> From: Yaron Haviv [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 3:05 PM > To: Rimmer, Todd; Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen); Kuchimanchi, Ramachandra; > Roland Dreier (rdreier) > Cc: openib-General > Subject: RE: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for SilverStorm > Virtual Ethernet I/O controller (VEx) > > > Todd, > > I'm trying to figure out why this protocol makes sense > As far as I understand, IPoIB can provide a Virtual NIC functionality > just as well (maybe even better), with two restrictions: > 1. Lack of support for Jumbo Frames > 2. Doesn't support protocols other than IP (e.g. IPX, ..) > > 1 can easily be addressed using IPoIB RC, and the question is if 2 is > really a problem (how many people use IPX or apple talk .. these days) > And if 2 is a problem why isn't it in a greater scope of supporting > Ethernet emulation even between any IB nodes, and not just from a host > to a gateway device. > > If this is a real requirement, why haven't SilverStorm worked with the > industry and standardization bodies such as IBTA or IETF to come with a > standard and interoperable way to address it, and not just try and push > a proprietary driver and a point solution to the kernel. > > I believe we should first see if such a driver is needed and if IPoIB > UD/RC cannot be leveraged for that, maybe the Ethernet emulation can > just be an extension to IPoIB RC, hitting 3 birds in one stone (same > infrastructure, jumbo frames for IPoIB, and Ethernet emulation for all > nodes not just Gateways) >
Hi Yaron, I was offline much of today, in reviewing the email on this topic it seems others have already answered most of your questions. So rather than belabor the topic, I would simply like to say that I agree with all the comments Rick, Fab and Michael have put forth. Todd Rimmer _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
