netdev - Re: bonding xmit

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:12:15 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Simon Chen <simonchennj@...il.com>
Cc:	Nicolas de Pesloüan 
	<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bonding xmit_policy

Le mardi 15 novembre 2011 à 01:20 -0500, Simon Chen a écrit :
> Thanks, my bad.
> 
> It is pretty strange that when I use 802.3ad mode, all my packets
> (from different TCP flows) egress the same NIC even though I choose
> xmit_policy to be layer3+4. That's why I wasn't quite sure whether the
> policy is indeed in place.
> 
> When I switch to balance-xor mode, the packets are roughly evenly
> distributed across two NICs.

AFAIK, layer4 information (soure/dst ports) is limited to ipv4 TCP/UDP
trafic.

Moreover, if your bond has 2 ports, only low order bit of source and dst
port is used.

layer4_xor = ntohs((*layer4hdr ^ *(layer4hdr + 1)));

So if your trafic is RTP, it probably use only even ports, (RTCP using
odd ports), and uses a single slave.

 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html