On Jul 15, 2008, at 7:30 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>> Minor clarification: we did not test RDMACM on RoadRunner.
> Just for further clarification - I did, and it wasn't a particularly
> experience. Encountered several problems, none of them overwhelming,
> my comments.
Ah -- I didn't know this. What went wrong? We need to fix it if
there are problems.
>> RDMACM, on the other hand, is *necessary* for iWARP connections. We
>> know it won't scale well because of ARP issues, to which the iWARP
>> vendors are publishing their own solutions (pre-populating ARP
>> etc.). Even when built and installed, RDMACM will not be used by
>> default for IB hardware (you have to specifically ask for it). Since
>> it's necessary for iWARP, I think we need to build and install it by
>> default. Most importantly: production IB users won't be disturbed.
> If it is necessary for iWARP, then fine - so long as it is only used
> specifically requested.
> However, I would also ask that we be able to -not- build it upon
> request so
> we can be certain a user doesn't attempt to use it by mistake ("gee,
> looks interesting - let Mikey try it!"). Ditto for ibcm support.
Pasha added configure switches for this about a week ago: