Hi, It would be good if only one were running (if they each have the same functionality). The bandwidth across the bmc interface is rather low, so the fewer duplicate consumers, the better.
--S Quoting Dale Ghent, who wrote the following on Mon, 27 Apr 2009: > > Sorry for the late reply to this thread, but one concern/test case I'd like > to raise is if there would be any collision between openipmi's ipmievd daemon > (svc:/network/ipmievd:default) and the freeimpi daemons running at the same > time. > > /dale > > On Apr 24, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > >> Michal Bachorik - Sun Microsystems - Prague Czech Republic wrote: >>> Gareth, >>> >>> thx for your answer. >>> >>> Michal >>> >>> On 04/24/09 20:50, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>>> I'm OK with the answer. >>>> >>>> I'd request/recommend that as a matter of good architecture, we (Sun) >>>> change our code so that *either* ipmitool *or* freeipmi is sufficient. >> >> Rereading the above sentence, I realize it can be misinterpreted. I think >> we need to pick one of these tools and standardize on it. I did not mean >> to imply that any tools should be modified to support both ipmitool and >> freeipmi. Sun need to choose one of the tools and use it for our base >> line. >> >> Hopefully the above statement is clearer. >> >> -- Garrett >>>> >>>> I think that probably means (since we don't have any other consumers for >>>> freeipmi) architectural advice to try to change the HPC software that >>>> you're planning on using freeipmi tools to be able to use ipmitool. >>>> Possibly that will require an RFE to upgrade ipmitool. >>>> >>>> Put another way, I perceive that it is fine to deliver freeipmi if it is >>>> useful for end-users or other free software. But I believe we >>>> (Sun/OpenSolaris) should standardize on just one of the two tools as a >>>> building block for our own internal software. >>>> >>>> -- Garrett >>>> >>>> Michal Bachorik - Sun Microsystems - Prague Czech Republic wrote: >>>>> Garret, >>>>> >>>>> I asked couple of Sun guys that are using ipmitool whether they see some >>>>> possible interactions: >>>>> >>>>> Kevin Song: ".. the two are independent ipmi client software." >>>>> Hesam Kohanteb: "..These are 2 different clients of IPMI Stack. " >>>>> Mehrdad Mojgani: "..what do they mean by two applications dependency >>>>> other than using the same common driver path and destination. >>>>> Wouldn't there is always a chance that applications can change what the >>>>> other one has set if they don't get exclusive access? " >>>>> >>>>> Well, is the answer "ipmitool and freeipmi are two independent tools" >>>>> satisfying? If not, I will use Mehrdad's words: "what exactly do you >>>>> mean by application dependency"? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Michal >>>>> >>>>> On 04/24/09 18:14, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>>>>> Michal Bachorik - Sun Microsystems - Prague Czech Republic wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can freeimpi and ipmitool coexist on the same platform? What int4tr >>>>>>> sorry, I do not not know what is "int4tr" - can you explain (or >>>>>>> provide me some link to docs, where I can study it - uncle google was >>>>>>> not helpful, sorry)? anyway, freeipmi and ipmitool can happily coexist >>>>>>> on the same platform. you can think of them like "vncviewer" and >>>>>>> "tvncviewier" (both are VNC clients and both can coexist on the same >>>>>>> platform) >>>>>> >>>>>> I meant to say "What interactions are there?" -- but it looks like the >>>>>> cat walked on my keyboard or something. Sorry about that. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Garrett >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opensolaris-arc mailing list >> opensolaris-arc at opensolaris.org > >
