From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] bonding: only rely on arp packets if arp monitor is used Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:01:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20140115.220132.1518410490710218099.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1389837916-5377-1-git-send-email-vfalico@redhat.com> <15764.1389848997@death.nxdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: vfalico@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, andy@greyhouse.net To: fubar@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:45192 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751401AbaAPGBd (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jan 2014 01:01:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <15764.1389848997@death.nxdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jay Vosburgh Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 21:09:57 -0800 > The main reason for preserving the non-validate behavior (any > traffic counts) is for the loadbalance (xor and rr) modes. In those > modes, the switch decides which slave receives the incoming traffic, and > so it's to our advantage to permit any incoming traffic to count for > "up-ness." The arp_validate option is not allowed in these modes > because it won't work. > > With these changes, I suspect that the loadbalance ARP monitor > will be less reliable with these changes (granted that it's already a > bit dodgy in its dependence on the switch to hit all slaves with > incoming packets regularly). Particularly if the switch ports are > configured into an Etherchannel ("static link aggregation") group, in > which case only one slave will receive any given frame (broadcast / > multicast traffic will not be duplicated across all slaves). > > I'm not sure that this change (the "only count ARPs even without > arp_validate" bit) won't break existing configurations. Did you test > the -rr and -xor modes with ARP monitor after your changes (with and > without configuring a channel group on the switch ports)? Sorry Jay, I only read this just now. I won't push these changes out until you've had some time to discuss them. To my untrained eye they looked rather straightforward :-)