Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
On 10/06/2015 09:53 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
From: Uwe Koziolek
With some very finicky switch hardware, active backup bonding can get into
a situation where we play ping-pong between interfaces, trying to get one
to come up as the active slave. There seems to be an iss
Jay Vosburgh wrote:
Jarod Wilson wrote:
Jarod Wilson wrote:
...
As Andy already stated I'm not a fan of such workarounds either but it's
necessary sometimes so if this is going to be actually considered then a
few things need to be fixed. Please make this a proper bonding option
which can be
Jarod Wilson wrote:
>Jarod Wilson wrote:
>...
>> As Andy already stated I'm not a fan of such workarounds either but it's
>> necessary sometimes so if this is going to be actually considered then a
>> few things need to be fixed. Please make this a proper bonding option
>> which can be changed at
On 10/09/2015 04:36 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> Jarod Wilson wrote:
> ...
>> As Andy already stated I'm not a fan of such workarounds either but it's
>> necessary sometimes so if this is going to be actually considered then a
>> few things need to be fixed. Please make this a proper bonding option
>>
Jarod Wilson wrote:
...
As Andy already stated I'm not a fan of such workarounds either but it's
necessary sometimes so if this is going to be actually considered then a
few things need to be fixed. Please make this a proper bonding option
which can be changed at runtime and not only via a module
Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
On 10/06/2015 09:53 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
From: Uwe Koziolek
With some very finicky switch hardware, active backup bonding can get into
a situation where we play ping-pong between interfaces, trying to get one
to come up as the active slave. There seems to be an iss
On 10/06/2015 09:53 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> From: Uwe Koziolek
>
> With some very finicky switch hardware, active backup bonding can get into
> a situation where we play ping-pong between interfaces, trying to get one
> to come up as the active slave. There seems to be an issue with the
> switc
Jarod Wilson wrote:
From: Uwe Koziolek
With some very finicky switch hardware, active backup bonding can get into
a situation where we play ping-pong between interfaces, trying to get one
to come up as the active slave. There seems to be an issue with the
switch's arp replies either taking too l
8 matches
Mail list logo