From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262606AbVCPOmM (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:42:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262602AbVCPOku (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:40:50 -0500 Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([24.172.12.4]:38410 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262605AbVCPOiK (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:38:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:37:45 -0500 From: "John W. Linville" To: Rick Jones Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ctindel@users.sourceforge.net, fubar@us.ibm.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com, jgarzik@pobox.com Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.11] bonding: avoid tx balance for IGMP (alb/tlb mode) Message-ID: <20050316143743.GC18393@tuxdriver.com> Mail-Followup-To: Rick Jones , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ctindel@users.sourceforge.net, fubar@us.ibm.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com, jgarzik@pobox.com References: <20050315215128.GA18262@tuxdriver.com> <4237833E.9080809@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4237833E.9080809@hp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:52:14PM -0800, Rick Jones wrote: > Is that switch behaviour "normal" or "correct?" I know next to nothing As Jay Vosburgh points-out, this patch only effects ALB and TLB modes. These are modes where the link partner is unaware of the bonded configuration. In effect, we are tricking the switch into behaving the way we desire. Since the switch is unaware of our bonded behaviour, I think it makes sense to accomodate this quirk related to IGMP snooping. John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com