On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Joachim Fenkes<fen...@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenst...@gmail.com> wrote on 01.07.2009 17:54:41: > >> It does say that the LID might not be valid even though non-zero. > > Can you elaborate on that? I can't seem to find that in the spec. > What I do find, though, is this: > > "If this value is non-zero, it is the DLID a requester _shall_ use to > access the > class services." -- v1.2, p736, line 7
Yes, that's same as v1.2.1 p.743 line 14. > > Which sounds to me like: If it's non-zero, it's valid and you must use it. v1.2.1 p.743 line 17 goes on to say: "The RedirectGID, the RedirectQP and RedirectP_Key from this redirect response are all valid, but the RedirectSL, RedirectFL, RedirectTC, and RedirectLID will in general not be valid; they must be replaced using a Path- Record obtained from the SA." Doesn't look like that was a change from v1.2 as there are no change bars. -- Hal >> I'm >> thinking of the more general case (future) rather than just IBM eHCA >> usage. > > I stopped thinking "eHCA only" two patches ago, don't worry ;) > > BTW, I'm going to be out of the office starting now and returning next > Tuesday, > so let's continue this discussion next week ;) > > Cheers, > Joachim > _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg