> 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/