From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: bridging + load balancing bonding Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:54:21 +0200 Message-ID: <4AE17D4D.7040808@gmail.com> References: <20091022122339.GA20148@spaans.fox.local> <4AE07D3C.3040702@gmail.com> <20091023083851.GA18457@spaans.fox.local> <4AE16F83.7080400@gmail.com> <20091023095137.GA22424@spaans.fox.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Jasper Spaans Return-path: Received: from gw1.cosmosbay.com ([212.99.114.194]:40108 "EHLO gw1.cosmosbay.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751339AbZJWJ4i (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:56:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20091023095137.GA22424@spaans.fox.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jasper Spaans a =E9crit : > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:55:31AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: >=20 >> Dont you think special attention is needed for multicast/broadcast t= rafic >> (they should be sent to both IDS) ? >=20 > Not really -- AFAIK we're currently not using the information encapsu= lated > in broadcast traffic to judge the unicast packets. Besides, we're > aggregating the results from the IDSes, so it shouldn't matter on whi= ch node > a packet is processed. >=20 > But if the need arises, this could be added quite easily to the code. >=20 OK I found following very interesting article that can give pretty good ad= vices http://lwn.net/Articles/145406/