Hi Bart, My another 2 cents:) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: >> o Simple configuration of IBNBD: >> - Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to be >> explicitly exported. > > That sounds like a security hole? I think the ability to configure whether or > not an initiator is allowed to log in is essential and also which volumes an > initiator has access to. Our design target for well controlled production environment, so security is handle in other layer. On server side, admin can set the dev_search_path in module parameter to set parent directory, this will concatenate with the path client send in open message to open a block device. > >> - Only IB port GID and device path needed on client side to map >> a block device. > > I think IP addressing is preferred over GID addressing in RoCE networks. > Additionally, have you noticed that GUID configuration support has been added > to the upstream ib_srpt driver? Using GIDs has a very important disadvantage, > namely that at least in IB networks the prefix will change if the subnet > manager is reconfigured. Additionally, in IB networks it may happen that the > target driver is loaded and configured before the GID has been assigned to > all RDMA ports. > > Thanks, > > Bart. Sorry, the above description is not accurate, IBNBD/IBTRS support GID/IPv4/IPv6 addressing. We will adjust in next post. Thanks, -- Jack Wang Linux Kernel Developer
