Upon reflection, I think you're right. I've just dropped this patch.
Ethan
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 07:13:34PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote:
>> Traditionally, (unless balancing was turned off), the bonding code
>> chose the active slave for all fl
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 07:13:34PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> Traditionally, (unless balancing was turned off), the bonding code
> chose the active slave for all flows which hadn't previously been
> allocated to another. This worked fine in theory because traffic
> would eventually be balanced
Traditionally, (unless balancing was turned off), the bonding code
chose the active slave for all flows which hadn't previously been
allocated to another. This worked fine in theory because traffic
would eventually be balanced away if there was congestion.
Instead of the historical approach, this
