From gd78059@sac.sfbay.sun.com Tue Mar 31 09:46:05 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2VGk40m023486 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2VGjrL1028885; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHD0066PQKQ0100@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHD00MH4QKC3BA0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:45:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (sac.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.132]) by dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2VGjg9b005176; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2VGjfXp023463; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:45:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gd78059@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id n2VGjfJv023459; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:45:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:45:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems" Subject: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: Xiuyan.Wang@sun.com, pdurrant@solarflare.com Message-id: <200903311645.n2VGjfJv023459@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 871 The following automatic case is submitted on behalf of Paul Durrant, and adds 10G Base-T link properties to the Mac layer. If anyone has any concerns, feel free to promote it to a fast track. PROBLEM dladm does not currently have linkprop names for enabling/advertisement of the 10Gbase-T link capability. Similarly the set of statistics enumerated by the Nemo mac_ether plugin does not cover 10Gbase-T either. This leaves a hole in the functionality of the system when installed with a 10Gbase-T NIC. SOLUTION Add the following linkprop names to dladm: adv_10gfdx_cap en_10gfdx_cap Add the following statistics to the mac_ether plugin: cap_10gfdx adv_cap_10gfdx lp_cap_10gfdx 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: ON 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Tue Mar 31 10:39:52 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2VHdqEx027554 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2VHdp2t002646 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:39:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHD00305T2FC200@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.Com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:39:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHD00JV3T2EDV40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.Com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:39:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2VHdo0h023641 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:39:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHD00H00RAAH200@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.Com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.Com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:39:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] ([unknown] [129.148.174.103]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHD00IART203Y60@mail-amer.sun.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:39:37 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:39:12 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <200903311645.n2VGjfJv023459@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: "Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems" Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Xiuyan.Wang@sun.com, pdurrant@solarflare.com Message-id: <1238521152.12850.57.camel@strat> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903311645.n2VGjfJv023459@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 421 On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 09:45 -0700, Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems wrote: > The following automatic case is submitted on behalf of Paul Durrant, and > adds 10G Base-T link properties to the Mac layer. +1 -Seb P.S.: I don't think +1's are required for self-reviewed closed-automatic cases, but I've been seeing other members throw their +1's in for such cases, which makes me doubt my understanding of the rules. From gdamore@sun.com Tue Mar 31 10:52:58 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2VHqvHh028070 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2VHqjbV026062 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:52:56 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHD00101TO77C00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHD00KUOTO7UH30@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2VHqtbn000378 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHD00200TB2Q700@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHD00M34TNQA8B0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:52:38 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <1238521152.12850.57.camel@strat> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Sebastien Roy Cc: "Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems" , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Xiuyan.Wang@sun.com, pdurrant@solarflare.com Message-id: <49D25866.8080205@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903311645.n2VGjfJv023459@sac.sfbay.sun.com> <1238521152.12850.57.camel@strat> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 593 Sebastien Roy wrote: > On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 09:45 -0700, Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems > wrote: > >> The following automatic case is submitted on behalf of Paul Durrant, and >> adds 10G Base-T link properties to the Mac layer. >> > > +1 > > -Seb > > P.S.: I don't think +1's are required for self-reviewed closed-automatic > cases, but I've been seeing other members throw their +1's in for such > cases, which makes me doubt my understanding of the rules. > > > I don't know if they are required or not... I've been doing so.... it certainly can't hurt. :-) -- Garrett From peter.memishian@sun.com Wed Apr 1 00:03:13 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3173DKT019228 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 00:03:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n3172DZO002558 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 08:03:12 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHE00B3NU95RH00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHE009DHU94MA60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (triplex.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.208]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31734mU050097 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31734W5005701 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meem@localhost) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n317341U005698; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:03:04 -0700 From: Peter Memishian Subject: re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] To: psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.4 (patch 21) "Educational Television" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Authentication-warning: triplex.eng.sun.com: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 487 It seems a shame to clutter the dladm link property space (and thus dladm show-linkprop output) with this sea of related knobs when we could instead use the same syntax that dladm show-ether uses to report this information and have a single "speed-duplex" link property that takes a list -- e.g.: dladm set-linkprop -p speed-duplex=10G-f,1G-f net0 It would also mean we wouldn't need to add a new property with every bump in speed. There's a bug logged on this: 6804384. -- meem From pdurrant@solarflare.com Wed Apr 1 00:15:00 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n317ExuK019330 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 00:15:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n317EsFo012867; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 15:14:56 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHE00D09USU9H00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHE006E2USTFGB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (ip122.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.122]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n316qaVA008752; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:14:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.11] [160.41.208.11]) by relay12i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1325681; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:14:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (relay11i.sun.com [129.179.4.121]) by mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-519042; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:14:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220] [216.237.3.220]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-48030289; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:14:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([195.137.14.130]) by exchange.solarflare.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:14:31 -0700 Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:14:27 +0100 From: Paul Durrant Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: peter.memishian@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> Organization: SolarFlare Communications Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.047sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Apr 2009 07:14:31.0821 (UTC) FILETIME=[80D8EBD0:01C9B299] Status: RO Content-Length: 652 Peter Memishian wrote: > It seems a shame to clutter the dladm link property space (and thus dladm > show-linkprop output) with this sea of related knobs when we could instead > use the same syntax that dladm show-ether uses to report this information > and have a single "speed-duplex" link property that takes a list -- e.g.: > > dladm set-linkprop -p speed-duplex=10G-f,1G-f net0 > > It would also mean we wouldn't need to add a new property with every bump > in speed. > > There's a bug logged on this: 6804384. > Architecturally it may be nicer, however I think a redesign of the dladm linkprops is beyond the scope of this case. Paul From peter.memishian@sun.com Wed Apr 1 00:18:13 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n317IDdk019555 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 00:18:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n317I7gn038529 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:18:12 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHE00D1NUYAMF00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHE006EHUY8FHC0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (triplex.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.208]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n317I7En056879; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n317I7xw005737; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meem@localhost) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n317I75I005734; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:18:07 -0700 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> To: Paul Durrant Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.4 (patch 21) "Educational Television" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> X-Authentication-warning: triplex.eng.sun.com: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 960 > > It seems a shame to clutter the dladm link property space (and thus dladm > > show-linkprop output) with this sea of related knobs when we could instead > > use the same syntax that dladm show-ether uses to report this information > > and have a single "speed-duplex" link property that takes a list -- e.g.: > > > > dladm set-linkprop -p speed-duplex=10G-f,1G-f net0 > > > > It would also mean we wouldn't need to add a new property with every bump > > in speed. > > > > There's a bug logged on this: 6804384. > > Architecturally it may be nicer, however I think a redesign of the dladm > linkprops is beyond the scope of this case. I'm not asking for a redesign with this case, but the current scheme can and should be improved upon, and if we do that we will probably need to declare what's being defined here (and the other similar tunables) as obsolete (or just yank them entirely, depending on the perceived impact). -- meem From pdurrant@solarflare.com Wed Apr 1 01:32:40 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n318WdXP024312 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n318Wb24010864; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHE00H2DYED2M00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:32:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHE00FE0YEA2Q60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n318OjMx013698; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:32:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.mms.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.232] [160.41.221.232]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3254238; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:32:32 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay43i.sun.com (relay43i.sun.com [192.5.209.74]) by mms49es.mms.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-772211; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:32:32 +0000 (Z) Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220] [216.237.3.220]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-25693396; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:32:32 +0000 (Z) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([10.17.20.82]) by exchange.solarflare.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:32:30 -0700 Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:32:26 +0100 From: Paul Durrant Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: peter.memishian@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.048sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Apr 2009 08:32:31.0208 (UTC) FILETIME=[65FAB680:01C9B2A4] Status: RO Content-Length: 832 Peter Memishian wrote: > > I'm not asking for a redesign with this case, but the current scheme can > and should be improved upon, and if we do that we will probably need to > declare what's being defined here (and the other similar tunables) as > obsolete (or just yank them entirely, depending on the perceived impact). > I guess some assessment needs to be made of how much scripting users are likely to have done based on the current set of linkprops. The current names were clearly chosen to be consistent with stats. and older drivers' ndd tunables. I think there is some merit in a newer scheme as you suggest, but consistency with older names/tools is clearly a good thing. Paul -- ============================== Paul Durrant Senior Staff Engineer Solarflare Communications Inc. ============================== From peter.memishian@sun.com Wed Apr 1 02:06:45 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3196j7G026977 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 02:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n3196gJf027856 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 02:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHE0040HZZ74D00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHE00JEWZZ7J140@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (triplex.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.208]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n3196gis043212; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n3196gwt005928; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meem@localhost) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n3196gUU005925; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:06:42 -0700 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> To: Paul Durrant Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.4 (patch 21) "Educational Television" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> X-Authentication-warning: triplex.eng.sun.com: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 741 > I guess some assessment needs to be made of how much scripting users are > likely to have done based on the current set of linkprops. The current > names were clearly chosen to be consistent with stats. and older > drivers' ndd tunables. I think there is some merit in a newer scheme as > you suggest, but consistency with older names/tools is clearly a good thing. New tools like dladm (and the release taxonomy for OpenSolaris) give us an opportunity to revisit previous decisions and hopefully come up with better solutions. I agree we need to do so carefully and there are pros and cons to both approaches; the intent of my earlier mail was to set expectations that the ground may be shifting in this space soon. -- meem From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Apr 1 04:44:41 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31BifZp000585 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 04:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31Bidqb008566; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 05:44:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF004077AGIN00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 04:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00JWM7AFI3D0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 04:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31BapNg016287; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:36:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n31BapcJ016284; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:36:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:36:51 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 1204 Peter Memishian writes: > > > I guess some assessment needs to be made of how much scripting users are > > likely to have done based on the current set of linkprops. The current > > names were clearly chosen to be consistent with stats. and older > > drivers' ndd tunables. I think there is some merit in a newer scheme as > > you suggest, but consistency with older names/tools is clearly a good thing. > > New tools like dladm (and the release taxonomy for OpenSolaris) give us an > opportunity to revisit previous decisions and hopefully come up with > better solutions. I agree we need to do so carefully and there are pros > and cons to both approaches; the intent of my earlier mail was to set > expectations that the ground may be shifting in this space soon. By "release taxonomy," I'm guessing that you're referring to the release binding for OpenSolaris. Do we actually have a release binding for it yet? Is it a major release? What does "uname -r" say? -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From sowmini.varadhan@sun.com Wed Apr 1 07:18:08 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31EI8u2010099 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31EI2ur009806 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00C0JEE6J600@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:18:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF004GMEE4H690@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:18:05 -0600 (MDT) Received: from quasimodo.East.Sun.COM (quasimodo.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.94]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31EI4jq006416; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:18:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from quasimodo.East.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by quasimodo.East.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31EFSlR028672; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:15:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from sowmini@localhost) by quasimodo.East.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n31EFSI8028671; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:15:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:15:28 -0400 From: sowmini.varadhan@sun.com Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: Peter Memishian Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <20090401141528.GK25391@quasimodo.East.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> X-Authentication-warning: quasimodo.East.Sun.COM: sowmini set sender to sowmini.varadhan@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-01-17) Status: RO Content-Length: 964 On (04/01/09 00:03), Peter Memishian wrote: > It seems a shame to clutter the dladm link property space (and thus dladm > show-linkprop output) with this sea of related knobs when we could instead > use the same syntax that dladm show-ether uses to report this information > and have a single "speed-duplex" link property that takes a list -- e.g.: > > dladm set-linkprop -p speed-duplex=10G-f,1G-f net0 > > It would also mean we wouldn't need to add a new property with every bump > in speed. > > There's a bug logged on this: 6804384. There are 2 aspects to it: one is the user-interface thorugh dladm itself, and the other is the library-kernel interface. I can see some benefit in allowing the library-kernel interface to have the ability to set single (speed-duplex) pairs. But whether each of those properties needs to go through ARC is a different question (for which, I hope, the answer is "no" because this is private to the library). --Sowmini From gdamore@Sun.COM Wed Apr 1 07:49:31 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31EnU1q012450 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:49:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31EnP5G003031 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 08:49:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00F33FUI9300@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:49:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF0045KFTXH2B0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:49:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31En9iN022989 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHF00H00FM2FV00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHF004P5FTSDZD0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:49:04 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM To: Peter.Memishian@Sun.COM Cc: Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@Sun.COM Message-id: <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1713 Peter Memishian wrote: > > > It seems a shame to clutter the dladm link property space (and thus dladm > > > show-linkprop output) with this sea of related knobs when we could instead > > > use the same syntax that dladm show-ether uses to report this information > > > and have a single "speed-duplex" link property that takes a list -- e.g.: > > > > > > dladm set-linkprop -p speed-duplex=10G-f,1G-f net0 > > > > > > It would also mean we wouldn't need to add a new property with every bump > > > in speed. > > > > > > There's a bug logged on this: 6804384. > > > > Architecturally it may be nicer, however I think a redesign of the dladm > > linkprops is beyond the scope of this case. > > I'm not asking for a redesign with this case, but the current scheme can > and should be improved upon, and if we do that we will probably need to > declare what's being defined here (and the other similar tunables) as > obsolete (or just yank them entirely, depending on the perceived impact). > I'd suggest for a more concrete proposal from you if you want to do that. I'm not a huge fan of the way the tunables work, but they fall out rather naturally from the way the 802.3 MII works. They allow one to specifically enable any set of abilities, and arbitrarily disable any specific ones. I know that most folks never use this ability beyond forcing a specific speed/duplex setting, but there could be some that are doing more unusual things with them. And, as Paul said, not this case. However, if you want to, we can promote this case to a fast track. I don't think that will change the fact that what you're looking for is out of scope for this case, though. - Garrett From Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Wed Apr 1 09:30:13 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31GUDxO015430 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31GUCdx002070; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00105KIB8000@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:30:11 -0600 (MDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00G7OKI9ZM90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:30:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.146.11.144] (sr1-jurassic-01.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.144]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31GU8XU251287; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:30:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:29:54 -0700 From: Kais Belgaied Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Peter.Memishian@sun.com, Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Message-id: <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080807) Status: RO Content-Length: 924 On 04/01/09 07:49, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > I'd suggest for a more concrete proposal from you if you want to do > that. I'm not a huge fan of the way the tunables work, but they fall > out rather naturally from the way the 802.3 MII works. They allow one > to specifically enable any set of abilities, and arbitrarily disable > any specific ones. I know that most folks never use this ability > beyond forcing a specific speed/duplex setting, but there could be > some that are doing more unusual things with them. > > And, as Paul said, not this case. > > However, if you want to, we can promote this case to a fast track. I > don't think that will change the fact that what you're looking for is > out of scope for this case, though. please do, I'm still not clear on why a combination of setting the existing 'speed' and 'duplex' link properties is not sufficient here. Kais. > > - Garrett > > From pdurrant@solarflare.com Wed Apr 1 09:34:32 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31GYWaB015872 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31GYNRT003986; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00B19KPH1U00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF008M0KP5K630@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:34:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31GVffd019660; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:34:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.mms.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.230] [160.41.221.230]) by relay41i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3731618; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:33:40 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay44i.sun.com (relay44i.sun.com [192.5.209.118]) by mms48es.mms.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1367705; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:33:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220] [216.237.3.220]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1961; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:33:36 +0000 (Z) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([10.17.20.82]) by exchange.solarflare.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:33:34 -0700 Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 17:33:30 +0100 From: Paul Durrant Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> To: Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Cc: "Garrett D'Amore" , Peter.Memishian@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D3975A.8010607@solarflare.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.043sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Apr 2009 16:33:34.0464 (UTC) FILETIME=[99D21000:01C9B2E7] Status: RO Content-Length: 436 Kais Belgaied wrote: > > I'm still not clear on why a combination of setting the existing > 'speed' and 'duplex' link properties is not sufficient here. > The speed and duplex properties do not control [X][G]MII capability advertisement; that is why the separate adv/en linkprops exist. Paul -- ============================== Paul Durrant Senior Staff Engineer Solarflare Communications Inc. ============================== From gdamore@sun.com Wed Apr 1 09:42:37 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31GgaSE016806 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31GgZl0018447 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00J01L30PD00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00E1JL2ZAZA0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31GgZIt012978 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHF00N00KBY4U00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHF00EPDL2YF9H0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:42:34 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Cc: Peter.Memishian@sun.com, Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D3997A.4010308@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1505 Kais Belgaied wrote: > On 04/01/09 07:49, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> >> I'd suggest for a more concrete proposal from you if you want to do >> that. I'm not a huge fan of the way the tunables work, but they fall >> out rather naturally from the way the 802.3 MII works. They allow >> one to specifically enable any set of abilities, and arbitrarily >> disable any specific ones. I know that most folks never use this >> ability beyond forcing a specific speed/duplex setting, but there >> could be some that are doing more unusual things with them. >> >> And, as Paul said, not this case. >> >> However, if you want to, we can promote this case to a fast track. I >> don't think that will change the fact that what you're looking for is >> out of scope for this case, though. > > please do, > > I'm still not clear on why a combination of setting the existing > 'speed' and 'duplex' link properties is not sufficient here. I'm promoting it to a fast track, timeout set for next Wednesday. (April 8). To answer your question: MII allows one to set any random set of "autonegotation" properties, so that you can for example, exclude all 10Mbps and all half duplex modes. Or you can force half duplex for all modes except 10G. Or whatever. Any combination. The autonegotiation logic is supposed to then pick the best of the modes you've allowed for. This is much different than just forcing a single speed & duplex setting. -- Garrett > > Kais. >> >> - Garrett >> >> > From gdamore@sun.com Wed Apr 1 09:47:18 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31GlH6u017082 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 09:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31GlFCK025872 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 17:47:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00C0JLARJD00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF008CMLAOKD50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31GlC5j008987 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHF00300KRYVD00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHF00491LAHGAB0@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:47:05 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D3975A.8010607@solarflare.com> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Paul Durrant Cc: Kais.Belgaied@sun.com, Peter.Memishian@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D39A89.4000904@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D37EE0.8000501@sun.com> <49D39682.8000304@Sun.COM> <49D3975A.8010607@solarflare.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 486 Paul Durrant wrote: > Kais Belgaied wrote: >> >> I'm still not clear on why a combination of setting the existing >> 'speed' and 'duplex' link properties is not sufficient here. >> > > The speed and duplex properties do not control [X][G]MII capability > advertisement; that is why the separate adv/en linkprops exist. > > Paul > That's right. In fact, those properties are *read only*, and reflect the current result of negotiation or settings made elsewhere. -- Garrett From peter.memishian@sun.com Wed Apr 1 11:20:54 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31IKr07025896 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31IKhUH002912 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:20:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00B0FPMPKE00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:20:49 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF0083PPMO0640@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:20:49 -0600 (MDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (triplex.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.208]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31IKm0D047796; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31IKlbn006540; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meem@localhost) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n31IKlQ2006537; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:20:47 -0700 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: James Carlson Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.4 (patch 21) "Educational Television" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> X-Authentication-warning: triplex.eng.sun.com: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 483 > By "release taxonomy," I'm guessing that you're referring to the > release binding for OpenSolaris. Do we actually have a release > binding for it yet? Is it a major release? What does "uname -r" say? This is a serious rathole, but it's obvious we are making some changes for OpenSolaris that are incompatible with Solaris 10. An obvious example in this space was removal of implicit VLANs; removing dladm link properties is certainly no more extreme than that. -- meem From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Apr 1 11:38:39 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31Iccxx027900 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31IcY1t015381; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:38:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00201QGB4K00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:38:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00MTQQGBEK40@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:38:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31IUkfo018899; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:30:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n31IUkDq018895; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:30:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:30:46 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 1352 Peter Memishian writes: > > > By "release taxonomy," I'm guessing that you're referring to the > > release binding for OpenSolaris. Do we actually have a release > > binding for it yet? Is it a major release? What does "uname -r" say? > > This is a serious rathole, but it's obvious we are making some changes for > OpenSolaris that are incompatible with Solaris 10. An obvious example in > this space was removal of implicit VLANs; removing dladm link properties > is certainly no more extreme than that. We didn't review that change with a Major release binding -- 2006/357 has a "Minor" release binding. We accepted it as a reasonable thing to do, given the fact that it was possible to adopt (and recommend) the new "create-vlan" style before upgrading, and provided that there was an upgrade mechanism that handled the transition properly (which the project team provided). I think my question stands. We don't know what the release binding for OpenSolaris is supposed to be, and it seems precipitous to approve or assume random changes are acceptable for "Major" release binding, because it's a one-way trap. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gdamore@sun.com Wed Apr 1 11:55:14 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31ItDAN029509 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31It5va017690 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 02:55:12 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF0040HR806Z00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00M4RR7ZEJ80@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31It693007016 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHF00M00R31K900@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHF0034WR7UEZ70@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:06 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: James Carlson Cc: Peter.Memishian@sun.com, Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 2400 James Carlson wrote: > Peter Memishian writes: > >> > By "release taxonomy," I'm guessing that you're referring to the >> > release binding for OpenSolaris. Do we actually have a release >> > binding for it yet? Is it a major release? What does "uname -r" say? >> >> This is a serious rathole, but it's obvious we are making some changes for >> OpenSolaris that are incompatible with Solaris 10. An obvious example in >> this space was removal of implicit VLANs; removing dladm link properties >> is certainly no more extreme than that. >> > > We didn't review that change with a Major release binding -- 2006/357 > has a "Minor" release binding. We accepted it as a reasonable thing > to do, given the fact that it was possible to adopt (and recommend) > the new "create-vlan" style before upgrading, and provided that there > was an upgrade mechanism that handled the transition properly (which > the project team provided). > > I think my question stands. We don't know what the release binding > for OpenSolaris is supposed to be, and it seems precipitous to approve > or assume random changes are acceptable for "Major" release binding, > because it's a one-way trap. > > Well, that's true for other parts of OpenSolaris too. IPS anyone? There is still a lot that's just unknown about the way OpenSolaris is release engineered ... too much of it is not in sync with the rest of the way things are done. (The separate defect tracking system is just one example...) That said, I'd prefer to try to avoid breakage unless there is some compelling need. Breaking link properties may be a small enough change that it could be done in the context of a minor release. But its all *moot* at this point. We have at hand a specific proposal, which is a straight-forward extension of already delivered architecture. It should have been automatic/self-review. We don't have any other specific proposal to change the link properties or link management. I'm sure that the submitter and I would probably be happy to entertain alternate proposals for the future -- *in the context of a different case*. Put another way, if you want to change the way link management is done, make submit a new case with a specific proposal. Please don't penalize this submitter/case for following already established architecture when there is no clear alternative. -- Garrett From peter.memishian@Sun.COM Wed Apr 1 12:44:18 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31JiIlg027195 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 12:44:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31JiGwe028913; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 12:44:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00J03THUEB00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:44:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF00877THT04D0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:44:17 -0600 (MDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (triplex.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.208]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31JiHED044981; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triplex.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n31JiGrO006842; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meem@localhost) by triplex.eng.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n31JiG8c006839; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:44:16 -0700 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: James Carlson , peter.memishian@Sun.COM, Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@Sun.COM Reply-to: peter.memishian@Sun.COM Message-id: <18899.50192.736502.322593@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.4 (patch 21) "Educational Television" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: triplex.eng.sun.com: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 445 > Put another way, if you want to change the way link management is done, > make submit a new case with a specific proposal. Please don't penalize > this submitter/case for following already established architecture when > there is no clear alternative. Again, no one is trying to punish the submitter. I am only trying to make the relevant folks aware of an impending course correction with this family of link properties. -- meem From gdamore@sun.com Wed Apr 1 12:49:51 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n31Jnpek027760 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 12:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n31JnoxO026545 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 13:49:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHF00A03TR2P200@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHF0080VTR2AUB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n31JnoqS009290 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHF00G00TJNCL00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for psarc-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHF007H1TR0U040@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for psarc-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:48 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <18899.50192.736502.322593@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: peter.memishian@sun.com Cc: James Carlson , Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49D3C55C.8000308@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> <18899.50192.736502.322593@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 584 Peter Memishian wrote: > > Put another way, if you want to change the way link management is done, > > make submit a new case with a specific proposal. Please don't penalize > > this submitter/case for following already established architecture when > > there is no clear alternative. > > Again, no one is trying to punish the submitter. I am only trying to make > the relevant folks aware of an impending course correction with this > family of link properties. > > So noted. Now lets remove any further discussion about such futures out of this case. -- Garrett From Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Tue Apr 7 09:40:29 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n37GeS3E000212 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:40:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n37GeQtd022022; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 10:40:28 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHQ00C31OZFYP00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHQ005BFOZDSCC0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.11.144] (sr1-jurassic-01.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.144]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n37GeOVw943979; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:40:24 -0700 From: Kais Belgaied Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49D3C55C.8000308@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@sun.com Reply-to: Kais.Belgaied@sun.com Message-id: <49DB81F8.1030805@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> <18899.50192.736502.322593@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3C55C.8000308@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080807) Status: RO Content-Length: 113 I requested more time for this case (timing out tomorrow) I'm fine with Paul & Garrett's answers. +1 Kais, From Garrett.Damore@SUN.COM Tue Apr 7 09:48:32 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n37GmVaZ000851 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n37GmHUS021509 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 17:48:31 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KHQ00F07PCV0E00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KHQ00G7RPCUL3F0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n37GmU9h001656 for ; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KHQ00M00OYPWW00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.153.2.14] ([unknown] [129.153.2.14]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KHQ00LMOPCSWIA0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:28 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 10G link properties [PSARC/2009/206 Self Review] In-reply-to: <49DB81F8.1030805@Sun.COM> Sender: Garrett.Damore@SUN.COM To: Kais.Belgaied@SUN.COM Cc: "Garrett D'Amore" , Paul Durrant , psarc-ext@SUN.COM Message-id: <49DB83DC.5030106@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <18899.4520.307382.999630@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D31453.1070409@solarflare.com> <18899.5423.176477.869261@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3269A.1000509@solarflare.com> <18899.11938.462958.286497@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.20947.750668.953262@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45183.824464.519174@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18899.45782.482956.87893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3B88A.1040707@sun.com> <18899.50192.736502.322593@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <49D3C55C.8000308@sun.com> <49DB81F8.1030805@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080807) Status: RO Content-Length: 186 On 04/07/09 09:40, Kais Belgaied wrote: > I requested more time for this case (timing out tomorrow) > I'm fine with Paul & Garrett's answers. > > +1 > > Kais, Thanks! -- Garrett From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Wed Apr 15 10:08:45 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3FH8jYs022604 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n3FH8fdG010822 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KI500K0PJMKO600@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KI500F25JM2DT50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n3FH8Qum017441 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KI500L00J13CC00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KI5008KIJM2S5F0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:08:26 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: PSARC 2009/206 10G link properties Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: PSARC-ext Reply-to: Garrett.Damore@sun.com Message-id: <49E6148A.5000808@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 55 This case was approved at PSARC today. -- Garrett