Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi_lan_open_session() question
,[ Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] | AB, I'm not doubting that it has a number of enhancements. However, | with all APIs, as you abstract away details you remove flexibility from | the programmer. For example, the strength of ipmipower is its protocol | parallelism. Its protocol parallelism comes from its manual | management of the ipmi protocol across all nodes. How can I still | achieve the performance of the old ipmipower if ipmipower is forced to | move to the UDM? ` Only those who wants to develop tools that needs to work both inband and outband seamlessly has to use UDM. Otherwise you are free to access any APIs at any layer. Only the redundant obsolete APIs are removed. UDM is not completely ready yet to accommodate all needs. Protocol parallelism should be achievable thru UDM too. Performance difference will not even be noticeable. I am planning to inline the calls. ,[ Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] | Another example. You assume in the UDM that users are willing to block | on a recvfrom() waiting for a reply from an IPMI cmd request. What if a | user doesn't want this?? ` UDM APIs will support non-blocking calls too. During UDM open call, you pass this option. ,[ Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] | I think if you can let us know what API functions may or may not | disappear, that would help things alot. I just don't believe its | correct to just assume that the UDM will be better than what currently | exists. ` If you notice, certain new functions will be prefixed with 2. Only those calls will be replaced. I will rename the old calls with new name or using a macro like FREEIPMI_FORCE_0_1_3_API. -- Anand Babu GPG Key ID: 0x62E15A31 Blog [http://ab.freeshell.org] The GNU Operating System [http://www.gnu.org] ___ Freeipmi-devel mailing list Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi_lan_open_session() question
,[ Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] | AB, | | libfreeipmi driver APIs will completely change in the next | release. | | I just want to be sure that a reasonable backwards compatibility | can be expected in 0.2.0. We all have code that isn't part of | FreeIPMI and some of the newer APIs may not be suitable/usable for | our needs. I know for a fact I cannot use the new sensors api at | all. If someone develops based out of the 0.1.3 API, I believe they | should still be able to use the old API if it is desired. ` So far we have retained backward compatibility. But our plans are to drop the old APIs as soon as all of the utilities (including external projects) report they are ready. I seriously recommend everyone to use the Unified Driver Model (UDM) interface. It has numerous enhancements * No global variables (thread safety). * Unified driver interface. Internally abstracts all inband, outofband and probing drivers. * Easier and cleaner API interface, fewer number of arguments. * It is easy to maintain UDM APIs unchanged across future releases because of its design. * LAN driver in UDM has serious enhancements and bug fixes. per-message-auth support will be enabled based on 'get-channel-auth-caps' returns automatically. This will be a big performance improvement (fewer bytes to transfer, one time password encryption). * Buffers re-used where ever possible through ipmi_device_t. This avoids unnecessary memory copying and allocation. 0.1.3 APIs impose a serious limitation if we want to move forward. Every IPMI command needs to be written for each driver and utilities becomes will go crazy supporting all the drivers. I can retain the old APIs till all utilities gets ported to newer APIs. But they will get no new enhancements. Coding freezing and QA releases will happen by end of October and Final release tentatively planned around end of November. I wish I can drop the APIs and have a clean start from 0.2.0 onwards. Our next major focus will be towards SOL support. -- Anand Babu GPG Key ID: 0x62E15A31 Blog [http://ab.freeshell.org] The GNU Operating System [http://www.gnu.org] ___ Freeipmi-devel mailing list Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi_lan_open_session() question
Yeah that was a typo Didn't fix my problem though.
Hmmm. Does something like 'ipmipower' atleast work?
Al
--
Albert Chu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
- Original Message -
From: James Laros [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 4:12 pm
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi_lan_open_session() question
On 16:07 Tue 27 Sep , Albert Chu wrote:
Hi Jim,
I think the open_lan_session() function was created a long time
ago as a
convenience function for libfreeipmi users. I know that the
ipmiutil author (ipmiutil.sourceforge.net) atleast uses it. I
suppose it has
never been used for the FreeIPMI tools because:
A) some tools like bmc-config only work in-band
B) some tools like ipmipower need to work more reliably/quickly and
therefore manually setup a lan session
This was the first direction I went and hit a bump with extracting the
temp session id. If I can't get past it I will send out a question.
As for the reason why your code isn't working with MD5, I'm
guessing:
sizeof(password),
should instead be
strlen(password)
Yeah that was a typo Didn't fix my problem though.
???
By the way it seems to return 0 but set errno to Success??
I see a few corner cases in the code. In particular the fallout
case for goto error;. I'll let AB talk about this since its his
part of
the lib :P
Al
--
Albert Chu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
- Original Message -
From: James Laros [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 2:51 pm
Subject: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi_lan_open_session() question
I have a question about the usage of ipmi_lan_open_session.
First off I don't see it used in any of the utilities
that come with the distro? Any reason?
I was doing things more by hand as in ipmipower until
I noticed this call.
More specific question if I use the call as follows the
Activate Session Application Response returns a completion
code of 0xcc (Invalid data field in request)
Wasn't sure if I need to pass in something for session_seq_num
or session_id??? In the request message the session_id seems be
set properly to a temp session id, session_seq is 0 which
should be
ok yes?
Note that if I run it with MD5 as an auth type and provide
username and password I never get an app response.
By the way it seems to return 0 but set errno to Success??
--
u_int8_t auth_type;
u_int8_t *username = root;
u_int8_t *password = yada;
u_int8_t priv;
priv = IPMI_PRIV_LEVEL_OPERATOR;
u_int32_t *session_seq_num;
u_int32_t *session_id;
session_seq_num = (u_int32_t *)malloc(sizeof(u_int32_t));
session_id = (u_int32_t *)malloc(sizeof(u_int32_t));
auth_type = IPMI_SESSION_AUTH_TYPE_MD5;
if (ipmi_lan_open_session(conn-fd,
(struct sockaddr *)(conn-
target_addr), sizeof(struct
sockaddr_in), IPMI_SESSION_AUTH_TYPE_NONE,
// auth_type,
username,
// password,
// sizeof(password),
NULL,
0,
INITIAL_OUTBOUND_SEQ_NUM,
priv,
session_seq_num,
session_id) 0 ) {
fprintf(stderr, Error: ipmi_lan_open_session %s\n,
strerror(errno));return -1;
}
---
Thanks if anyone can help.
Jim
--
__
James Laros ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept. 09224
Scalable Systems Integration .. PHONE:505.845.8532
Sandia National Labs FAX:505.844.9297
__
Is someone getting the best of you?
- Foo Fighters
___
Freeipmi-devel mailing list
Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
--
__
James Laros ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept. 09224
Scalable Systems Integration .. PHONE:505.845.8532
Sandia National Labs FAX:505.844.9297
__
Is someone getting the best of you?
- Foo Fighters
___
Freeipmi-devel
