AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<Rendell.Fong@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	1253723874.14287.39.camel@rendellf
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:39:54 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: Rendell Fong <Rendell.Fong@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: TuxStor schedule v1
Message-ID: <20090923113954.493fdcb2@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <1253723874.14287.39.camel@rendellf>
References: <E1EC65251D4B3D46BBC0AAA3C0629222A90B8239@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<861DA0537719934884B3D30A2666FECC94302CEF@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<4AB965EC.4080006@lsi.com>
	<861DA0537719934884B3D30A2666FECC94302D14@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<4AB96BD5.8050109@lsi.com>
	<1253668569.14287.22.camel@rendellf>
	<861DA0537719934884B3D30A2666FECC94302D37@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<1253723874.14287.39.camel@rendellf>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All I have so far is the overview which you've seen.  Feel free to
write up whatever snippets, whole documents, whatever.  As I said
before, I am happy to do the formatting and editing, and contribute
wherever I can given my available time.  I also happy to take rough
sketches and expand them into full documentation chunks, paragraphs,
etc.

On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:37:54 -0600 Rendell Fong <Rendell.Fong@lsi.com>
wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> Have you started a design document?  It seems like Max assuming that
> we are still building tuxrx with no changes to SSC daemons.
> 
> I don't know what purpose it serves to perpetuate the ipm message api
> when its a thing of the past.  Since virtual server IP address and
> route configuration can be administered from user space, the simplest
> approach is to let vsd do it directly.  Otherwise a new user daemon
> will need to be created to act as ipm.  Note that this is in addition
> to ipmd which currently exists.  There's no way to not make any
> changes to vsd assuming we are merging SSC, TXRX and FP for tuxstor.
> 
> R
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 19:35 -0600, Kozlovsky, Maxim wrote:
> > 
> > >> 	The SSC daemons are untouched. Andy/Rendall can speak on
> > >> the txrx
> > >side
> > >> daemons. The initial proposal was a trivial port of the
> > >> EEE based code to Linux, however that has some issues due to the
> > >> nature of the new VS implementation, since that is not
> > >> a solution for what they need. Andy/Rendall ?
> > >> >
> > >
> > >I've made numerous changes to vsd to support configuration of the
> > >vsvr interfaces, IPs, and routes.  It won't be handled via ipm
> > >anymore. However, I can't build it yet since the build of ssc is
> > >in a broken state.
> > [MK] 
> > The original design we all agreed upon was that we are not going to
> > do any changes to the SSC daemons. The only thing necessary was
> > implementing the IPM calls on the txrx side. I strongly recommend
> > that you write the design document before doing any more
> > modifications.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > >I've also patched existing vsvr code (vs-api.c) and added it to the
> > >module.  At this point it is not checked in since it can't be
> > >tested. I don't know what plans Andy has for deleting/replacing
> > >some of its functionality.
> > >
> > 
> 
