Thanks Andreas
Turns out that I was able to get access to a local resource, so I won't be
needing the assist after all.
Appreciate the offer!
Ralph
On Jul 26, 2013, at 11:51 PM, Andreas Schäfer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got a small devel cluster set up with both, IPv4 and IPv6. Would
> that setup b
Hi,
I got a small devel cluster set up with both, IPv4 and IPv6. Would
that setup be suitable, or are you looking for a IPv6-only machine? I
could give you an account there.
Best
-Andreas
On 15:18 Fri 26 Jul , Ralph Castain wrote:
> Just curious: does anyone out there have a couple of IPv6
Bogdan Costescu :
>The question is then what to do about the names given in the
>machinefile ? Should they just be passed to the rsh/ssh client hoping
>that they would work ? Should there be an option for resolving the
Just passing the contents of the machinefile is the way the current code
wor
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
1. Put IPv[46] addresses into the machinefile. Since they are
protocol-specific, both rsh/ssh uses them just the way they are.
Yes, this would work. The machinefile could come from the user or from
a batch/queueing system, but this should signify
Bogdan Costescu :
>I beg to disagree. In a setup like the one mentioned, after orted is
>started via an IPv4-only rsh/ssh, OpenMPI applications could use IPv6
>without problems, just like they could use f.e. GM if Myrinet cards
>would be present. I see this very much like your past experience wi
* Bogdan Costescu wrote on Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 05:34:56PM CEST:
>
> IMHO code can simply be shared and only the really different part
> should be made independent. This is more a question of whether the
> build system would allow such a scheme and of the runtime behaviour
> (for static linking
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
This would result in an enormous amount of duplicated code, since
the IPv4->IPv6 transition would only affect a small fraction of the
total tcp BTL codebase. This is clearly a violation of the DRY
principle (don't repeat yourself).
IMHO code can s
I think that would be okay - certainly makes a good starting point! If
it becomes an issue later, we can revisit at that time.
Thanks
Ralph
Christian Kauhaus wrote:
Ralph Castain :
Actually, we have some sensor network folks that are interested in
using OpenRTE for their ap
Ralph Castain :
> Actually, we have some sensor network folks that are interested in
> using OpenRTE for their applications. Their platforms can be small
> microprocessors, many with custom mini-operating systems. Almost
> none support IPv6 nor have any knowledge of that protocol.
I see. D
Bogdan Costescu :
>What you propose here should work for the case of a single BTL that
>handles both IPv4 and IPv6. How about the case of 2 BTLs ? (as it's
>not clear to me from the rest of the discussion if one solution is
>better than the other)
The introduction of a new 'tcp6' BTL was mentio
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
So the resolver already does the complicated work for us, since it
returns all addresses associated to a given target (hostname or
IP-addr notation) in the order of decreasing preference.
What you propose here should work for the case of a single
On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 12:03:00AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 11:06:55AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote:
>
> > > One little problem here is that it is possible to disable the
> > > IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses at least under Linux and some BSD variants.
> > > For Linux, have a l
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 11:06:55AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > One little problem here is that it is possible to disable the
> > IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses at least under Linux and some BSD variants.
> > For Linux, have a look at sys.net.ipv6.bindv6only. Some authors even
> More specifically,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:55:28PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Have not:
> HP-UX 11.00
HPUX 11iv2 has, for the early HPUX-11 versions there
is TOUR (Transport Optional Upgrade Release)
--
mail: a...@thur.de http://adi.thur.de PGP: v2-key via keyserver
Schlecht: Du kannst deine
Actually, we have some sensor network folks that are interested in
using OpenRTE for their applications. Their platforms can be small
microprocessors, many with custom mini-operating systems. Almost none
support IPv6 nor have any knowledge of that protocol.
Ralph
Christian Kauhaus wrote:
Ralph Castain :
>From the run-time perspective, whatever you do *must* support heterogeneous
>networks of computers that may and may not support IPv6, and may and may not
>support IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses. In other words, the solution must support
>systems including computers that only know IPv4.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 06:53:05PM +0200, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
> Adrian Knoth :
> >(I really prefer the v6-mapped-v4 solution with a single
> > socket, thus eliminating this problem)
>
> One little problem here is that it is possible to disable the
> IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses at least under L
Hi folks
Sorry to be coming late to the discussion - I'm on travel, so my
comments will likely have long time delays in them.
Only one contribution I would like to make. You are welcome to do
whatever you like (subject to the usual approval procedure) in the MPI
layer (the btl's for example)
Adrian Knoth :
>(I really prefer the v6-mapped-v4 solution with a single
> socket, thus eliminating this problem)
One little problem here is that it is possible to disable the
IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses at least under Linux and some BSD variants.
For Linux, have a look at sys.net.ipv6.bindv6only.
Bogdan Costescu :
>- are all computers that should participate in a job configured
>similarly (only IPv6 or both IPv4 and IPv6) ? If not all are, then
>should some part of the computers communicate over one protocol and
>the rest over the other ? I think that this split coomunication would
Thi
Brian Barrett :
>Great! We currently only have IPv4 support, but IPv6 has always been
>on the wishlist. Most of the developers in the States don't have
This is very fine. :-)
>As far as I'm aware, there is no one working on IPv6 support for Open
>MPI. We would welcome anyone willing to w
* Adrian Knoth wrote on Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:33:29PM CEST:
>
> If there is really a platform without sockaddr_in6
*snip*
> As far as I know: All BSDs have v6, Linux has, HPUX, AIX, Solaris,
> Windows (XP for sure, 2000 experimental, 9X/ME don't).
As determined by a cheap
find /usr/include -
On Mar 31, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:21:42PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Perhaps it's a good idea to port any internal structure to
IPv6, as it is able to represent the whole v4 namespace.
One can always determine whether it is a real v6 or only
a mapp
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:21:42PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Perhaps it's a good idea to port any internal structure to
> > IPv6, as it is able to represent the whole v4 namespace.
> > One can always determine whether it is a real v6 or only
> > a mapped v4 address (the common ::: pref
* Adrian Knoth wrote on Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 04:59:42PM CEST:
>
> Perhaps it's a good idea to port any internal structure to
> IPv6, as it is able to represent the whole v4 namespace.
> One can always determine whether it is a real v6 or only
> a mapped v4 address (the common ::: prefix)
I'm
On Mar 31, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:36:31AM -0500, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
wrote:
I have no personal experience with IPv6, but one thought that
strikes me
is that the components might be able to figure out what to do by
looking
at/parsing either t
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Brian Barrett wrote:
Are your hosts configured for both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic (or are they
IPv6 only)?
This is a big question and one that basically stopped me from adding
IPv6 support to LAM/MPI some 3 years ago. There are several things
that have to be considered:
-
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:36:31AM -0500, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
> I have no personal experience with IPv6, but one thought that strikes me
> is that the components might be able to figure out what to do by looking
> at/parsing either the hostnames or the results that come back from
> reso
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:07:39AM -0500, Brian Barrett wrote:
> > I have a first quick and dirty patch, replacing AF_INET by AF_INET6,
> > the sockaddr_in structs and so on.
> Is there a way to do this to better support both IPv4 and IPv6?
I think so, too. There are probably two different ways t
> -Original Message-
> From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org
> [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Brian Barrett
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:08 AM
> To: Open MPI Developers
> Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] IPv6 support in OpenMPI?
>
> From a practical sta
On Mar 31, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:44:11AM +0200, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
Hello *,
Hi.
University of Jena (Germany). Our work group is digging into how to
connect several clusters on a campus.
I think I'm also a member of this workgroup, though I
On Mar 31, 2006, at 3:44 AM, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
first I'd like to introduce myself. I'm Christian Kauhaus and I am
currently working at the Department of Computer Architecture at the
University of Jena (Germany). Our work group is digging into how to
connect several clusters on a campus.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:44:11AM +0200, Christian Kauhaus wrote:
> Hello *,
Hi.
> University of Jena (Germany). Our work group is digging into how to
> connect several clusters on a campus.
I think I'm also a member of this workgroup, though I am not
working at University of Jena, but studyi
33 matches
Mail list logo
