IPMI doesn't work...

[Jeff]

Jung-uk Kim wrote:

>On Tuesday 15 March 2005 01:14 am, Jeff Behl wrote:
>  
>
>>Julian Elischer wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Jeff wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I'm not sure what you mean by in band.  The IP address of the
>>>>BMC is assigned via the bios and is different from what the OS
>>>>later assigns.  With imiptool we can turn on/powercycle/monitor
>>>>via the BMC assigned address up until the point where the kernel
>>>>loads.  Once it does, the BMC no longer responds.  This doesn't
>>>>happen with the two linux distros we've tried it on.  Wtih both,
>>>>including SuSE, we can still query/control via the BMC using
>>>>ipmitool.  It seems to be some sort of driver issue to me.  I
>>>>find it confusing that the NIC is shared between the BMC and the
>>>>OS, but I guess that's just how it's done.  Perhaps the bsd
>>>>broadcomm driver is simply blocking this somehow...
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>you have to assign it the same address!
>>>      
>>>
>>that's not the way it's supposed to work, afaik.  it'd be silly to
>>tie the BMC address and the OS assigned address together.  you give
>>the BMC an ip address via a little program that comes from IBM and
>>this address is independent of the ip address that whatever os you
>>use on the system assigns to the nic.  the redbook that Jung-uk
>>sent a link for shows this process if you're interested.
>>    
>>
>
>I believe you are correct.  If you have the same IP address, the 
>packet reaches host OS and (I think) it must be discarded by OS.  
>IPMI spec. is very verbose but I found very simple explanation here:
>
>http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethereal-dev/200304/msg00233.html
>
>'IPMI messages are encapsulated in Remote Management Control Protocol 
>packets.  RMCP is a UDP-based protocol that uses port 623 for remote 
>system control when the system is in a pre-os or os-absent state.  
>RMCP can also use port 664 for secure traffic.'
>
>FYI, IPMI v2.0 defines extended RMCP, so called RMCP+.
>
>  
>
>>like i said earlier, having different ip addresses (the BMC's being
>>in private address space) works fine with the linux kernel...
>>    
>>
>
>Just out of my curiosity, are you using bcm or tg3 driver on Linux?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jung-uk Kim
>  
>
the tg3, according to lsmod.  it looks like the bcm and the tg3 share 
common code (tigon3.c is included in the bcm source)...