From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Susi Subject: Re: 802.3ad bonding brain damaged? Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 16:06:13 -0400 Message-ID: <4E4041B5.5040908@cfl.rr.com> References: <4E3EECF6.90409@cfl.rr.com> <1312790234.7020.26.camel@arkology.n2.diac24.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Lamparter Return-path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.122]:57662 "EHLO cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751408Ab1HHUHR (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 16:07:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1312790234.7020.26.camel@arkology.n2.diac24.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 8/8/2011 3:57 AM, David Lamparter wrote: > 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?