Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:56:16 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To:     Sun Shouxin <sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn>
Cc:     j.vosburgh@gmail.com, vfalico@gmail.com, andy@greyhouse.net,
        davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
        yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, dsahern@kernel.org, oliver@neukum.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        huyd12@chinatelecom.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] net:bonding:Add support for IPV6 RLB to
 balance-alb mode
Message-ID: <YjhLwNoTbg1UU2qH@nanopsycho>
References: <20220321084704.36370-1-sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn>
 <20220321084704.36370-5-sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220321084704.36370-5-sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn>
Precedence: bulk

Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 09:47:04AM CET, sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn wrote:
>This patch is implementing IPV6 RLB for balance-alb mode.

As I stated in the other thread, I strongly believe it is bad idea to
add this code. It is not needed. User should use LACP and not obscure
ALB/RLB mode. It should not be extented. On contrary, I would like to
see this going opposite direction and eventually remove ALB/RLB mode
from bonding.