[cgl_discussion] Hot Plug support for PICMG2.16

Mika Kukkonen mika at osdl.org
Fri Jan 10 11:58:01 PST 2003

I have been hoping that some of our more knowledgeable participants 
would answer this one, but I guess I'll have to expose my cluelessness
again ... :-)

On to, 2003-01-09 at 13:37, John Grana wrote:
> 1) IPMI - aka PICMG 2.9.
>  Benefits - fairly simple, already has definition for Vendor/Device ID
> information in a format that is easy to map to the PCI config cycles. Is
> required in AdvancedTCA and maybe even PCI Express.
> Disadvantages - not mandatory in PICMG (is a "should" not a "shall").

I think IPMI is the only one we have been discussing, and looking at
your other alternatives, I find it hard to think we would go to those
(because of the networking issues as you have pointed out).

> Not sure which is ideal, any ideas on the above or others? I have just read
> that Monte Vista and Nokia are working on Hot Device Identity. Should I be
> taking this up with them???

Yes, those are the folks (+ maybe Intel IPMI people) I was waiting to
answer this email.


More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list