From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3wrg0p1qz0zDq7c for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:44:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v5J5hxPB070962 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 01:44:55 -0400 Received: from e38.co.us.ibm.com (e38.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.159]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2b64htgew7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 01:44:55 -0400 Received: from localhost by e38.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:44:54 -0600 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.130.20) by e38.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.138) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:44:53 -0600 Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.232]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v5J5iqqm20316282; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 22:44:52 -0700 Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C92436E03A; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:44:52 -0600 (MDT) Received: from birb.localdomain (unknown [9.81.207.113]) by b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EDF06E038; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:44:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: by birb.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F1CC84EC5FE; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:44:48 +1000 (AEST) From: Stewart Smith To: Adriana Kobylak Cc: OpenBMC Maillist Subject: Re: OpenBMC Image Management In-Reply-To: References: <75C63AB7-E340-4A78-BA82-80F96EAEA051@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170127030706.GB5504@heinlein.lan> <87o9ypw13y.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170131181641.k3jnv73ha5v2kjsh@asimov> <2DA4883E-3015-4FDF-92FC-F6761436585D@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <87y3sv8str.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:44:48 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17061905-0028-0000-0000-000007D62EBD X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00007254; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000214; SDB=6.00876840; UDB=6.00436738; IPR=6.00656979; BA=6.00005429; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00015878; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2017-06-19 05:44:53 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17061905-0029-0000-0000-00003647AFC7 Message-Id: <87mv945y5r.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-06-19_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1706190098 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 05:44:58 -0000 Adriana Kobylak writes: >> Why is there mboxbridge separate from phosphor-mboxd? > > Because the mboxbridge is being used by other companies as a reference > to be able to implement the mailbox daemon in their own BMC firmware > stack for other openpower systems, we didn=E2=80=99t want to =E2=80=9Cpol= lute=E2=80=9D the > repository with openbmc-specific and c++ implementation that could > confuse them. Why are there OpenBMC specific things in mboxd? Why can't the reference implementation be used? What's deficient in it? --=20 Stewart Smith OPAL Architect, IBM.