On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) < jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote:
> > I would have agreed with you if the current code was doing a better > decision of what is local and what not. But it is not, it simply remove all > 127.x.x.x interfaces (opal/util/net.c:222). Thus, the only thing the > current code does, is preventing a power-user from using the loopback > (despite being explicitly enabled via the corresponding MCA parameters). > > Fair enough. > > Should we have a keyword that can be used in the > btl_tcp_if_include/exclude (e.g., "local") that removes all local-only > interfaces? I.E., all 127.x.x.x/8 interfaces *and* all local-only > interfaces (e.g., bridging interfaces to local VMs and the like)? > > We could then replace the default "127.0.0.0/8" value in > btl_tcp_if_exclude with this token, and therefore actually exclude the > VM-only interfaces (which have caused some users problems in the past). I thought about having a more global naming scheme when writing the RFC, but then I decided I was only interested in minimizing the scope and impact of the patch (allowing developers to debug non-vader/sm processes on a non-internet connected machine). George.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@lists.open-mpi.org https://rfd.newmexicoconsortium.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
