netdev - Re: Is sch_teql still useful?

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]

Message-Id: <20150201.222741.1721645652546390344.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 01 Feb 2015 22:27:41 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	cwang@...pensource.com
Cc:	jhs@...atatu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: Is sch_teql still useful?

From: Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:23:32 -0800

> Since we have bonding alb, is it still needed to have sch_teql since
> they do the same thing, load balancing over multiple interfaces? Also
> sch_teql mixes netdevice with qdisc, which somewhat breaks the
> abstraction?
> 
> I don't dig the history so I could easily miss something here.

I can't comment as to it's usefulness, but I will note that we don't
have the option of removing it if you are thinking about doing so.
--
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