From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9DFC433E0 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 15:23:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56BA23A01 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 15:23:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727764AbhAHPWz (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:22:55 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:43976 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726977AbhAHPWy (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:22:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1610119287; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/aeFvJpJFMTwfZ7/vJ01xGc8codi2ZIp83v/Ajx1hj0=; b=MCopq8l26+2IMzUgEB01vLTbR+2+38HEyMzunJLn5irx6KfWXb2MVNHixktbIeCM4gT9jv aC5Edbmw4yPFekOCCjrPMnNnWA3teO0pz3S6MP5OZf8Qxh7MlLdmJHZi/G8kYvrBA8bbQZ /qsqDqB/zePx76DoL6oci+oHbNL2UNA= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-116-4dDv4JWPP7aKlhsYflMGiA-1; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 10:21:23 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 4dDv4JWPP7aKlhsYflMGiA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9252C803621; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 15:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (dhcp-17-185.bos.redhat.com [10.18.17.185]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A1205D9C0; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 15:21:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:21:17 -0500 From: Jarod Wilson To: Jiri Pirko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh , Veaceslav Falico , Andy Gospodarek , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Thomas Davis , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] bonding: add a vlan+srcmac tx hashing option Message-ID: <20210108152117.GC63172@redhat.com> References: <20201218193033.6138-1-jarod@redhat.com> <20201228101145.GC3565223@nanopsycho.orion> <20210107235813.GB29828@redhat.com> <20210108131256.GG3565223@nanopsycho.orion> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210108131256.GG3565223@nanopsycho.orion> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 02:12:56PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:58:13AM CET, jarod@redhat.com wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:11:45AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> 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 ? :) > > > >That's actually one of the things that was suggested, since team I believe > >already has support for this, but the user really wants to use bonding. > >We're finding that a lot of users really still prefer bonding over team. > > Do you know the reason, other than "nostalgia"? I've heard a few different reasons that come to mind: 1) nostalgia is definitely one -- "we know bonding here" 2) support -- "the things I'm running say I need bonding to properly support failover in their environment". How accurate this is, I don't actually know. 3) monitoring -- "my monitoring solution knows about bonding, but not about team". This is probably easily fixed, but may or may not be in the user's direct control. 4) footprint -- "bonding does the job w/o team's userspace footprint". I think this one is kind of hard for team to do anything about, bonding really does have a smaller userspace footprint, which is a plus for embedded type applications and high-security environments looking to keep things as minimal as possible. I think I've heard a few "we tried team years ago and it didn't work" as well, which of course is ridiculous as a reason not to try something again, since a lot can change in a few years in this world. -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com