On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:52:14PM -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> Is that switch behaviour "normal" or "correct?" I know next to nothing
As Jay Vosburgh points-out, this patch only effects ALB and TLB modes.
These are modes where the link partner is unaware of the bonded
configuration. In effect, w
Rick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> treats IGMP packets the same as all other non-broadcast traffic (i.e.
>it
>will attempt to load balance). This switch behavior seems rather odd in an
>aggregated case, given the fact that most traffic (except broadcast packets)
>will be load balanced by the
Is that switch behaviour "normal" or "correct?" I know next to nothing about
what stuff like LACP should do, but asked some internal folks and they had this
to say:
treats IGMP packets the same as all other non-broadcast traffic
(i.e. it
will attempt to load balance). This switch behavior se
Add special case to bond_alb_xmit() to avoid tx balance for IGMP.
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Some switches (e.g. the Cisco Catalyst 3750) use IGMP snooping to
determine which hosts belong to which multicast groups. Typically
such switches use a timeout to determine wh
4 matches
Mail list logo
