Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi 2.0 branch

[Albert Chu]

> I am thinking if you should start IPMI-2.0 work in the current branch
> itself. We can always say 2.0 support as experimental. Otherwise you
> will still have to go thru the pain of merging at some point.

I think I'll keep it in a branch.  I guess it's development philosophy
differences.  I'm not a big fan of dumping very new untested
experimental code into a soon to be new release.  Remember, I release
this code into our production environment :-)

> I should have made a test release 2 weeks ago. But Bala got struck
> with the new LAN stack as he is developing on a remote system. It has
> a bug. It seems to lock the BMC for auth-types other than
> AUTH_TYPE_NONE and the system needs physical power-cycle (removing the
> power chord). Can you continue his work and see what went wrong in the
> new code. 

Are you referring to the unified driver stuff?  I can take a look.  Just
point me in the direction of what new API calls/options/whatever aren't
working.

Al

--
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

----- Original Message -----
From: Anand Babu <address@hidden>
Date: Thursday, November 3, 2005 6:50 pm
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi 2.0 branch

> ,----[ Albert Chu <address@hidden> ]
> | Ab, Bala, etc.,
> | I'm starting some development in the branch 'al_ipmi_2_0_branch'.
> `----
> I am thinking if you should start IPMI-2.0 work in the current branch
> itself. We can always say 2.0 support as experimental. Otherwise you
> will still have to go thru the pain of merging at some point.
> 
> I should have made a test release 2 weeks ago. But Bala got struck
> with the new LAN stack as he is developing on a remote system. It has
> a bug. It seems to lock the BMC for auth-types other than
> AUTH_TYPE_NONE and the system needs physical power-cycle (removing the
> power chord). Can you continue his work and see what went wrong in the
> new code. 
> 
> I suspect it has to do with session and session-auth header. 
> 
> After you fix this bug, I want add support for
> per-message-auth-disable. This means if lan-channel-auth-caps reports
> per-message-auth as disabled, then session-auth will be used only
> during session initiation. Bala will take care of this. Immediately
> after finishing this we will make a test release.
> 
> I am still travelling and should be back on 11th. 
> 
> -- 
> Anand Babu 
> GPG Key ID: 0x62E15A31
> Blog [http://ab.freeshell.org]              
> The GNU Operating System [http://www.gnu.org]  
>