Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 May 2002 00:41:38 +0200 | From | Lars Marowsky-Bree <> | Subject | Re: InfiniBand BOF @ LSM - topics of interest |
| |
On 2002-05-15T17:36:27, Russell Leighton <russ@elegant-software.com> said:
> Lot's of very cool ideas for IB ...not knowing much about IB, but > being curious and interested, I have a question which may be stupid > so I apoligize in advance if it is... > > Can we really have these sort of low level IB interactions and have : > - security issues addressed, mostly an issue if the devices are over > a network w/other devices
The idea is that the IB interconnect is "trusted". Doing very low level kernel operations cluster-style over a non-trusted link is asking for it; either you lose security-wise or performance for authentication / encryption _will_ kill you.
The real interesting question from my side is "availability"; how does the kernel deal with crashed nodes, loss of link etc? If you already had agreed or semi-standard interfaces here, we would gladly pick them up.
These generic cluster interfaces are being discussed as part of the Open Clustering Framework now, and it would be good if a kernel developer reviewed the discussions regarding the generic event mechanism proposed from a kernel perspective.
Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>
-- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |