Subject: [rddp] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:55:43 -0500

Here's the updated RDDP over SCTP draft.  Please note the alternative
possibilities for text in Sections 5 and 6.  We need to select from
among these alternatives, and I'd like to try to do this on the mailing
list in the next few weeks.  The resulting draft will become a
draft-ietf-rddp-* draft.  Thanks, --David

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 7:53 AM
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

	Title		: Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Remote

                          Direct Memory Access (RDMA) Direct Data Placement 
                          (DDP) Adaption
    	Author(s)	: R. Stewart
	Filename	: draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt
	Pages		: 20
	Date		: 2002-12-12
	
This document describes a method to adapt Direct Data Placment (DDP)
and Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) to Stream Control Transmission
Protocol (SCTP) RFC2960 [2] using a generic description found in
[RDMA-Draft] [4] and [DDP-Draft] [3] This adaption provides a method
for two peers to know that each side is performing DDP or RDMA thus
enabling hardware acceleration if available.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:56:11 -0500

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:15:25 -0500

Resending, just in case the first one got eaten ... apologies if
this is a duplicate.

This is the draft on RDDP over SCTP.  Please note the alternative
approaches in Sections 5 and 6.  Once we select approaches in these
areas (next few weeks, on the list, I hope), a revised version of
this draft should become a draft-ietf-rddp-*-00 draft.

Thanks,
--David

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 7:53 AM
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-stewart-rddp-sctp-01.txt

	

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:15:55 -0500

---

From: "Williams, Jim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:13:53 -0500

> From: Caitlin Bestler [mailto:[email-masked]]

[jimw:]
> > This is not completely clear to me.
> > Does this mean that if 
> > the DDP+RDMA adaption indication is
> > done for a specific association, 
> > then ALL traffic over that association is DDP+RDMA?

> The intent is [...]

It sounds like the summary of your six paragraphs is "yes".
I like the answer.  Just suggesting it could be a little
clearer in the draft.  (But maybe it's clear enough
and I just missed it.)

> The Payload Protocol Identifier would be
> a good place to move 
> the DDP Queue ID, but doing so would require
> changes to both DDP and MPA. It didn't seem
> worthwhile.

I would have thougth the  first two bytes of the
DDP header would make sense in the PPI.  This
is really opcode stuff that defines what the
payload is.  This leaves 16 bits of PPI for
other stuff and fixes alignment.

Whether it changes DDP is really a matter
of documentation style.  Arguably you are not 
changing the DDP header, you are just
changing how that header is carried by SCTP.

On the other hand, I don't see any problem
with changing DDP if it makes sense.

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