https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-11865 Lustre <p>Currently the NID for loopback shows as "0@lo"</p> <div class="code panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="codeContent panelContent"> <pre class="code-java"> # lnetctl net show net: - net type: lo local NI(s): - nid: 0@lo status: up interfaces: 0: lo </pre> </div></div> <p>It would be better if the  loopback IP address is used instead of 0 in loopback NID.</p> <p> </p> LU-11865

Use loopback address instead of 0 for loopback NID

Improvement Minor Closed Won't Do Sonia Sharma Sonia Sharma Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:46:56 +0000 Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:53:07 +0000 Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:53:07 +0000 0 3 <p>What is the motivation behind this change, and why do you say "better"? Using e.g. 127.0.0.1 would IMHO add confusion because the <tt>@lo</tt> interface is <b>not</b> the TCP loopback interface, it is internal to LNet, so if you show 127.0.0.1 here it would give the false impression that it relates to TCP loopback, when in reality it has no relation.</p> <p>Amir, James and I were discussing this LNet sysfs patch, wherein we make providing network interface information necessary.<br/> <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/33583/3" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/33583/3</a></p> <p>While discussing this, we thought of having the interface name specified for loopback nid as well so as not to special case the loopback NID. In this discussion, the idea came up to have an address for "lo" NID instead of 0.</p> <p>I just discussed with Amir and James again on this and they agree to your thought of not confusing this with the tcp loopback. So we will keep this as it is. <br/> I am closing this ticket.</p> <p>Thanks</p> Development Rank 1|i009lr: Rank (Obsolete) 9223372036854775807