> > * Section 3.17: To resolve a conflict with the new architecture, IPMP > > Singleton no longer allows an IP data address to double as an IP test > > address. More generally, this section has been expanded to cover > > additional issues we (the Sun Cluster and Clearview teams) discovered > > while bringing a Clearview IPMP cluster up. > > Does this project obsolete 2002/278 (Singleton IPMP Group) and
It mostly obsoletes 2002/278 (the idea of a Singleton IPMP group remains, but there's no sharing of data and test addresses). Oddly, the only interfaces exported by that case are the IP_DONTFAILOVER_IF and IPV6_DONTFAILOVER_IF ioctls; those are in the removed interface list for this case (see ipmp-20q.txt) > 2002/763 (Contract for use of SIOCGLIFGROUPNAME)? Yes, for the SIOCSLIFGROUPNAME part. > Is there a new contract to replace PSARC/2002/763-01? We were planning on providing a new contract once Sun Cluster is actually supported on Nevada and we (the IPMP team and Sun Cluster team) are in a position to do thorough testing and discover exactly what they need. > > * Section 5.18: To ensure IPMP-unaware MIB applications won't trip over > > IPMP test address information, a synthetic EXPER_IP_AND_TESTHIDDEN > > MIB level has been added. > > This will remove information that used to show up in the MIB, and thus > cause a small loss of observability for IPMP machines managed by SNMP. > > I think we should have ARC advice added to the opinion: management > needs to be advised that while this is an improvement in accuracy of > the data, it's also a regression, and that we need to have updates to > the SNMP implementation to support IPMP (perhaps via a private MIB). OK. -- meem
