Subject: Re: connection bonding?
To: None <tech-net@NetBSD.org>
From: Pavel Cahyna <email@example.com>
Date: 12/07/2005 23:22:16
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 08:07:40AM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 12:29:46PM -0800, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > Some vendors use the marketing term "bonding". Cisco (the giant in
> > that market) uses EtherChannel or Gigabit Etherchannel. Other vendors
> > use "teaming".
> Vendors (especially in the wintel space) use "teaming" to mean all
> sorts of things, from purely link-state based NIC failover, to the
> STP-based teaming you can do with our bridge(4), through to LACP-based
> load-balancing like agr(4), and many weird and wonderful things in
Please, does LACP (with agr or not) do also redundancy, or only increase
throughput? I could not find this in the agr(4) man page. That is, if two
links are aggregated, and one fails, do all the frames go through the
other, or is one half of them lost?