From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42DCC433F5 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 11:35:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235856AbiCRLgR (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:36:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52600 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231757AbiCRLgQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:36:16 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B5EF20C187 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 04:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id h1so9895510edj.1 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 04:34:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=7Vsx1O3ZE0erPRGw1F/SDJoi6n0+3wA7RndYVxGvgu0=; b=2gThkbf8h0EXaDAo2KxDjcBDMcKUx9Bavoq5aQWn4WaTV/ILGHsZHYN0kS7HWDi50e aIe9KMfyAg1/BREaoMa7Y6UTn5eam9OoQkf45CetyMq9Kgbi8RJChuM2QQU4Mj5VOS8B 8cKisLLajUM+JshKXp6/N5AN/GjirEnJfeZ+V1t5bD9u9NRP5FN9MFV0uPZzfgKpT9QK 12Dq7iv0HISYGcuIy2i+f8HjQRicXT4EEGAN84dIq0Ghl9XGsg9k0l1M8DWHALtBboiI b5Vx1NuyaBpSXzExzhzyS6v4gHWe9bJSPA4PWCCLtayPqzFWkShTAVhCmrPNL89INRkG 6JRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=7Vsx1O3ZE0erPRGw1F/SDJoi6n0+3wA7RndYVxGvgu0=; b=mZxRXrDM5awI13f+WEvjGKDYF9gInGundlDX304K7bLeexnareN0EuYZ+/AifeBXl/ z/jLbegUBflAK9H16np7iX7oiE6T97aKk9LqlXtUujUFHADYfSp5is4zXZCQFgm+Acwd L4UnBYqtiKxeQGtPtCCHPwOoi3y1DpMZosNuBL+MQeJnPRz4pfwf0rli32fvvNWObdy8 z0DUa7OXw45Mta0DZEEH9wFpf2cPeowdHcXB1GGzed2UEANf3ZYqZWwvoIZHFd+KV4PY F3Qk/Np98JHvbKutY1OFukBxTNLcPWmINZSOKxTGgplNs287xSo63C0F1q+NrvOWRa2b CFkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531G/yv4dXmw13pkegKkgYU0tMyCj8AjTQqwVwm7zfvu/t1D0MZy PEGjqMv2Tj8UEEAbEj2kgtSwMw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJznjKparJZUW0yeV6RL1SNF8ap7H0fZJWAJXvRusO3+YXv8ovBoGc/RiPUPrEYTyFQ8EEIBow== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2811:b0:419:12:abd0 with SMTP id h17-20020a056402281100b004190012abd0mr6100097ede.143.1647603294065; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 04:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([86.61.181.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s7-20020a170906778700b006df7e0e140bsm3436195ejm.140.2022.03.18.04.34.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 18 Mar 2022 04:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2022 12:34:52 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko To: =?utf-8?B?5a2Z5a6I6ZGr?= Cc: j.vosburgh@gmail.com, vfalico@gmail.com, andy@greyhouse.net, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, dsahern@kernel.org, oliver@neukum.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, huyd12@chinatelecom.cn Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] net:bonding:Add support for IPV6 RLB to balance-alb mode Message-ID: References: <20220317061521.23985-1-sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn> <1f7b15a6-861f-9762-a159-73d16c95eebc@chinatelecom.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1f7b15a6-861f-9762-a159-73d16c95eebc@chinatelecom.cn> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 10:49:02AM CET, sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn wrote: > >在 2022/3/17 16:11, Jiri Pirko 写道: >> Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 07:15:21AM CET, sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn wrote: >> > This patch is implementing IPV6 RLB for balance-alb mode. >> > >> > Suggested-by: Hu Yadi >> > Signed-off-by: Sun Shouxin >> >> Could you please reply to my question I asked for v1: >> Out of curiosity, what is exactly your usecase? I'm asking because >> I don't see any good reason to use RLB/ALB modes. I have to be missing >> something. >> >> This is adding a lot of code in bonding that needs to be maintained. >> However, if there is no particular need to add it, why would we? >> >> Could you please spell out why exactly do you need this? I'm pretty sure >> that in the end well find out, that you really don't need this at all. >> >> Thanks! > > >This patch is certainly aim fix one real issue in ou lab. >For historical inheritance, the bond6 with ipv4 is widely used in our lab. >We started to support ipv6 for all service last year, networking operation >and maintenance team >think it does work with ipv6 ALB capacity take it for granted due to bond6's >specification >but it doesn't work in the end. as you know, it is impossible to change link >neworking to LACP >because of huge cost and effective to online server. I don't follow. Why exactly can't you use LACP? Every switch supports it.