Subject: [Ipoverib] 4/9 deadline for a consensus call

From: "H.K. Jerry Chu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 12:15:22 -0800 (PST)

At the Minneapolis/IETF meeting we had a "room concensus" on the
following:

1. Embedding EtherType in the IPoIB UD payload.
2. Requiring IPv4 over IB to have a minimal MTU of 1500.
(This effectively rules out all the IB MTUs less than 2K for
running IPoIB.)
3. Using DHCP broadcast flag to solve the chaddr length problem
so the IPoIB hardware address stays as QPN+GID.

During the past two weeks since the meeting minutes was published
I have not heard of any objection or different opinion. The DHCPv4
over IB work seems to be going well too. So I'm inclined to declare
the above as WG concensus. But I'm willing to wait til next Tuesday
(4/9) COW for anyone to voice a different opinion. If you do decide
to object, I'd urge you to bring forward a strong case, e.g. new,
convincing evidence that shows the above is really problematic. We
have spent enough time bashing these topics it's time for us to
move on.
 
Your friendly co-chair

_______________________________________________
IPoverIB mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipoverib

---

From: Michael Krause <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 07:22:01 -0700

>1. Embedding EtherType in the IPoIB UD payload.

I've seen strong consensus on the reflector that indicates it should not be 
used.  I don't want to resurface all of the arguments but there were more 
against this from what I could see.

>(This effectively rules out all the IB MTUs less than 2K for

Clarified to be for IB UD transport service.

Mike