Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:04:00 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: Poor Performance for ethernet bonding |
| |
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 08:45:33AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On the surface, multi-path routing sounds complicated to me, while > layer-2 bonding seems relatively trivial to set up/administer. Since we do > support bonding, if it's a simple fix to make it better, we > might as well do that, eh?
multipath routing is really not complicated; I don't know why it "sounds" complicated to you. Of course you could always add new features to the kernel because the existing ones which do the same thing in a better way "sound complicated" to someone; I doubt it is a good use of developer time however.
BTW when you would teach bonding about flows it wouldn't be layer-2 anymore.
To kill the "sounds complicated" myth:
ip route add 10.0.0.0/8 nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1
gives you a multipath route with eth0 and eth1 with the same weight for 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0. If you replace 10.0.0.0/8 with default it'll be your default route. The kernel does the rest.
-Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |