> Yes lacp_negotiated is true if and only if LACP has decided at least
> one slave may be enabled. I orginally explicitly enforced this in
> bond_choose_output_slave(), but it's unnecessary. Perhaps I should
> bring that patch back for clarity though? It may be safer than
> relying on the LACP co
> Is this commit complete? It looks like the following code remains in
> bond_check_admissibility():
>
> case BM_TCP:
> /* TCP balancing has degraded to SLB (otherwise the
> * bond->lacp_negotiated check above would have processed this).
> *
> * Fall through.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:40:03AM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> In the original Open vSwitch LACP implementation, when no slaves
> found a LACP partner, the LACP module would attach all of them.
> This allowed the LACP bond to fall back to a standard bond when
> partnered with a non-LACP switch.
In the original Open vSwitch LACP implementation, when no slaves
found a LACP partner, the LACP module would attach all of them.
This allowed the LACP bond to fall back to a standard bond when
partnered with a non-LACP switch. In practice, this has caused
confusion with marginal benefit, so this f
