Re: Bonding support for eth1394?

[Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>]

Roland Dreier wrote on 2007-10-13:
>  > The bonding sources have a few occurrences of EOPNOTSUPP.  Unless I
>  > missed something, they are all related to setting the hardware address
>  > of the interface.  AFAICS this is impossible with IP over FireWire.  If
>  > it is crucial to bonding to be able to change the slaves' hardware
>  > addresses, then you are out of luck.
> 
> There are a few changes to the bonding driver pending that will add
> support for bonding IP-over-InfiniBand interfaces.  IPoIB also cannot
> change its HW address, so the patches address that issue.
> 
> Once those patches land, bonding eth1394 interfaces may "just work".

Bill Fink wrote on 2007-10-14:
> While that might allow multiple eth1394 interfaces to be bonded,
> I believe the user wanted to bond an eth1394 interface with a normal
> Ethernet interface, and I don't think that will work even with the
> IPoIB bonding changes, since bonding of different fundamental types
> of network interfaces still won't be supported, and I'm pretty sure
> eth1394 is not considered a standard Ethernet interface (different
> MAC address format for one thing).


Karl, you could try kernel 2.6.24(.2) which AFAIU features the mentioned 
changes.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- --=- =--==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/