John Plocher wrote:
> Vincent Wang wrote:
>> AMT is currently an 'Intel only' technology.
>
>
> What is obvious here is that of the two failure modes:
> A) "being different from Intel" and
> B) "evolving incompatibly",
>
> the first is much much more undesirable.
>
> Vincent's comment that "It has been evolving from v1.0 to v3.0.
> And we've already heard about AMT 5.0" suggests strongly that this
> project needs to include the version number AND to support the
> coexistence of multiple versions on/in a system (i.e., this
> project shouldn't be hardcoded to just support version 2.3...).
>
This project supports AMT 3.x and higher systems. Intel states future
versions will be forward compatible. So, e.g. AMT 5.x is expected to
work with our implementation. However, AMT 1.x & 2.x are not supported
in this project. We've not received marketing requirements to support
versions less than AMT 3.x.
> I'm not sure of the usage model, but it should be possible to
> find out which version(s) of AMT is/are being exposed and to
> tailor ones interactions appropriately...
>
> -John
