Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 28 Dec 2020 11:11:45 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To:     Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@gmail.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Davis <tadavis@lbl.gov>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] bonding: add a vlan+srcmac tx hashing option
Message-ID: <20201228101145.GC3565223@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <20201218193033.6138-1-jarod@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201218193033.6138-1-jarod@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 08:30:33PM CET, jarod@redhat.com wrote:
>This comes from an end-user request, where they're running multiple VMs on
>hosts with bonded interfaces connected to some interest switch topologies,
>where 802.3ad isn't an option. They're currently running a proprietary
>solution that effectively achieves load-balancing of VMs and bandwidth
>utilization improvements with a similar form of transmission algorithm.
>
>Basically, each VM has it's own vlan, so it always sends its traffic out
>the same interface, unless that interface fails. Traffic gets split
>between the interfaces, maintaining a consistent path, with failover still
>available if an interface goes down.
>
>This has been rudimetarily tested to provide similar results, suitable for
>them to use to move off their current proprietary solution.
>
>Still on the TODO list, if these even looks sane to begin with, is
>fleshing out Documentation/networking/bonding.rst.

Jarod, did you consider using team driver instead ? :)