Skip to main content

IP over InfiniBand (IPoIB) Architecture
RFC 4392

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2018-12-20
04 (System)
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'InfiniBand is a high-speed, channel-based interconnect between systems and devices.

This document presents an overview of …
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'InfiniBand is a high-speed, channel-based interconnect between systems and devices.

This document presents an overview of the InfiniBand architecture. It further describes the requirements and guidelines for the transmission of IP over InfiniBand. Discussions in this document are applicable to both IPv4 and IPv6 unless explicitly specified. The encapsulation of IP over InfiniBand and the mechanism for IP address resolution on IB fabrics are covered in other documents. This memo provides information for the Internet community.')
2012-08-22
04 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Allison Mankin
2006-04-10
04 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2006-04-10
04 Amy Vezza [Note]: 'RFC 4392' added by Amy Vezza
2006-04-07
04 (System) RFC published
2004-05-18
04 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2004-05-17
04 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2004-05-17
04 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2004-05-17
04 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2004-05-04
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ipoib-architecture-04.txt
2004-05-03
04 Margaret Cullen State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed by Margaret Wasserman
2004-05-03
04 Allison Mankin [Ballot Position Update] Position for Allison Mankin has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Allison Mankin
2004-05-03
04 Allison Mankin
[Ballot comment]
Margaret and Vivek have shown a draft of the 04 revision which makes clear
that the IPv6 address use is a format.  It …
[Ballot comment]
Margaret and Vivek have shown a draft of the 04 revision which makes clear
that the IPv6 address use is a format.  It no longer mentions "valid IPv6 addresses".
It doesn't quite describe the allocation process to the extent of stating that GIDs
are not allocated by RIRs from the global IPv6 space, but there is no reason to
imagine that they are from this document.  I've removed my Discuss based on
the pre-submission 04.
2004-04-04
04 Margaret Cullen State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Margaret Wasserman
2004-04-02
04 Amy Vezza State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza
2004-04-02
04 Allison Mankin
[Ballot discuss]
Explain that the addresses are not "valid IPv6 addresses" in that the
infiniband forum does not intend IB sites to ask an IPv6 …
[Ballot discuss]
Explain that the addresses are not "valid IPv6 addresses" in that the
infiniband forum does not intend IB sites to ask an IPv6 address registry
to allocate them from global IPv6 address space.  This is
undoubtably fixable with an RFC Editor note by changing/removing the
word valid and stating in the places where the term "valid IPv6
address" appeared that there was no intention to use addresses
from the global IPv6 address space including currently unallocated
IPv6 address space.  My point here is that even though huge, IPv6
address space, unlike EUI (IEEE MAC addresses) is not intended
for media-level addressing.  I am eager to resolve this Discuss very
quickly.
2004-04-02
04 Allison Mankin [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin
2004-04-02
04 Russ Housley [Ballot comment]
Remove the document references from the Abstract.

  Should there be a question mark in the title of section 3.3?
2004-04-02
04 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bert Wijnen has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Bert Wijnen
2004-04-02
04 Bert Wijnen [Ballot comment]
Section 2.0 talks about "MIBs".
The proper terminology is: "MIB Modules".

There is one MIB which is composed of multiple MIB Modules.
2004-04-02
04 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen
2004-04-02
04 Thomas Narten [Ballot comment]
abstract doesn't satisfy ID nits

references not split
2004-04-02
04 Thomas Narten [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Thomas Narten by Thomas Narten
2004-04-02
04 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2004-04-01
2004-04-01
04 David Kessens [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens
2004-04-01
04 Harald Alvestrand [Ballot comment]
Reviewed by Michael Patton, Gen-ART
Minor issues found, not blocking, copied to document log. Typos are in filed review.
2004-04-01
04 Harald Alvestrand [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Harald Alvestrand by Harald Alvestrand
2004-03-31
04 Ted Hardie [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Hardie by Ted Hardie
2004-03-31
04 Russ Housley
[Ballot comment]
Remove the document references from the Abstract.

  Remove the discussion about site-local addresses.

  Should there be a question mark in the …
[Ballot comment]
Remove the document references from the Abstract.

  Remove the discussion about site-local addresses.

  Should there be a question mark in the title of section 3.3?
2004-03-31
04 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley
2004-03-30
04 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot comment]
References need normative/informative split.
2004-03-30
04 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck
2004-03-26
04 Steven Bellovin
[Ballot comment]
It's nice to see a link layer that's designed for IPv6!

The paragraph mentioning site-local addresses should probably be modified to note that …
[Ballot comment]
It's nice to see a link layer that's designed for IPv6!

The paragraph mentioning site-local addresses should probably be modified to note that they've been deprecated for IPv6.
2004-03-26
04 Steven Bellovin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Steve Bellovin by Steve Bellovin
2004-03-25
04 Margaret Cullen [Note]: 'This document has references in the abstract that will need to be removed.' added by Margaret Wasserman
2004-03-25
04 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman
2004-03-25
04 Margaret Cullen Ballot has been issued by Margaret Wasserman
2004-03-25
04 Margaret Cullen Created "Approve" ballot
2004-03-25
04 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2004-03-25
04 (System) Last call text was added
2004-03-25
04 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2004-03-14
04 Margaret Cullen State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Publication Requested by Margaret Wasserman
2004-03-14
04 Margaret Cullen Placed on agenda for telechat - 2004-04-01 by Margaret Wasserman
2004-03-08
04 Dinara Suleymanova Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova
2003-10-23
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ipoib-architecture-03.txt
2003-09-11
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ipoib-architecture-02.txt
2002-02-04
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ipoib-architecture-01.txt
2002-01-03
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ipoib-architecture-00.txt