On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 12:58:57PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> Please keep replies on the list.
>
> > That's a good point for why a TCP flow cannot be distributed
> > to different links simultaneously. Thanks a lot.
> > But the TCP SACK mode can handle the out of order issue, isn't it?
>
> I'm not a tcp expert. My understanding is that out of order packets
> typically cause tcp backoffs. I may be wrong on this point, but in
> general networking equipment tries to deliver packets in order for
> this reason. Even if tcp can handle it gracefully, a bonding
> implementation that consistently delivers packets out of order is
> incorrect.
According to this:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg152688.html
splitting a TCP flow between links would violate the LACP
specification.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
