> For balance-slb the results shouldn't be as obviously bad, but balance-slb > is definitely not designed considering that situation, so this commit > generalizes the advice across balance-slb also.
FWIW balance-slb can't work for the same reason. They could choose different active interfaces, in which case all broadcast traffic will be dropped. (Haven't reviewed this patch). Ethan > > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> > --- > vswitchd/vswitch.xml | 9 +++++++-- > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/vswitchd/vswitch.xml b/vswitchd/vswitch.xml > index 7b30ce8..480fd63 100644 > --- a/vswitchd/vswitch.xml > +++ b/vswitchd/vswitch.xml > @@ -802,8 +802,13 @@ > > <group title="Bonding Configuration"> > <p>A port that has more than one interface is a ``bonded port.'' > Bonding > - allows for load balancing and fail-over. Some kinds of bonding will > - work with any kind of upstream switch:</p> > + allows for load balancing and fail-over.</p> > + > + <p> > + The following types of bonding will work with any kind of upstream > + switch. On the upstream switch, do not configure the interfaces as a > + bond: > + </p> > > <dl> > <dt><code>balance-slb</code></dt> > -- > 1.7.2.5 > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openvswitch.org > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
