Re: bonding vs 802.3ad/Cisco EtherChannel link agregation

[Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"David S. Miller" wrote:
>    From: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
>    Okay, that makes me even more curious why we don't send successive
>    packets out successive pipes in a bonded link.
> 
> This is not done because it leads to packet reordering which
> if bad enough can trigger retransmits.
> 
> Scott Feldman's posting mentioned this, as did one other I
> think.

I did see those posts, but then I saw yours on how the linux receive end does 
the right thing with
regards to reordering, and that confused me.

So if I have it right linux-linux could theoretically work okay with a single 
stream over multiple
links (potentially causing lots of reordering), but linux-router would not work 
well.


Chris