Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

From: Donald Kerr (Don.Kerr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-09 16:45:16


I guess I have not read enough about iwarp yet but if iwarp is sitting
below ib verbs or udapl in the stack and is trying to impose
restrictions which ib verbs or udapl do not adhere to then maybe iwarp
is in the wrong place in the ofed stack.
 
Having said that I do agree the OMPI community needs to consider where
iwarp plays in its own stack. If it has not already.

Steve Wise wrote:

>On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 16:27 -0400, Donald Kerr wrote:
>
>
>>So then I agree with Andrew, I think you are trying to impose
>>restrictions on uDAPL which are not part of the Spec.
>>
>>
>>
>
>true, but if you want a single btl for IB and IW, then you'll need to
>address this issue in some way...
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>devel mailing list
>devel_at_[hidden]
>http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>
>