Subject: Re: connection bonding?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Eric Haszlakiewicz <email@example.com>
Date: 12/08/2005 16:24:28
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 12:29:46PM -0800, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> I understand where you're coming from but I think it's a lost cause.
> Some vendors use the marketing term "bonding". Cisco (the giant in
> that market) uses EtherChannel or Gigabit Etherchannel. Other vendors
> use "teaming".
> Now that IEEE-802 has defined a standard, lets stick with the IEEE
> name: link aggregation.
That's a stupid reason to make things harder to find. It seems entirely
reasonable to have a title on the agr man page that says something like:
link aggregation pseudo network interface driver (aka bonding or teaming)
especially since it'd be such a big help to someone trying to find
that particular man page. Just because there's a "standard name" doesn't
mean that people are going to magically purge all the other names from use
or from their thoughts.