Re: 802.3ad bonding brain damaged?
flat view
From: Chris Friesen <hidden>
Date: 2011-08-08 20:15:42
On 08/08/2011 02:06 PM, Phillip Susi wrote:
On 8/8/2011 3:57 AM, David Lamparter wrote:quoted
No, it isn't. 802.3ad/.1AX explicitly requires that no packet re-ordering may ever occur, which can only be guaranteed by enqueueing packets for one host on one TX interface. This behaviour is mandated by 802.1AX-2008 page 15 which reads:Outch, that does cause a big problem for store-and-forward switching. You basically can't split up packets from a single stream without very careful cut-through switching, which we obviously can't do in Linux. That seems a rather silly requirement given that higher level protocols already deal with packet reordering. Why not an option to say stuff the standard?
Bonding doesn't know about "higher level protocols". Also, assuming that higher level protocols already deal with reordering can be dangerous. I've dealt with network protocols and apps that assumed there would be no reordering because at the time they were written they used point-to-point links. They actually work fairly well with single links, so it would be reasonable to try and keep them working with bonded links. Chris -- Chris Friesen Software Developer GENBAND chris.friesen@genband.com www.genband.com