Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:37:33 -0800 (PST) | From | George Bonser <> | Subject | Re: Again: EQL - someone's use this thing yet? |
| |
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:
> > MAC addresses are not essential, they may be equal, may be not equal. > The devices can be just completely physically different. > F.e. you can balance 100Mbit ethernet and 2400baud slip line fairly, > both of them will get fair share of packets 8) > > It uses standard protocol methods to resolve addresses. > > Alexey
Unless it has been updated recently, by "balancing" a 100BaseT and a 2400 baud, you are going to get an effective throughput of 4800 baud. That is from our experiance with it. You get N times the slowest link where N is the number of circuits in the group. If you balance two 33.6K modems and one makes a 14.4 connection, you end up with 28.8. Note that might have been with an older EQL, but it looks to me like it was doing straight round-robin balancing which can not go faster than the slowest link * the number of links.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |