From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Oct 12 7:56:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from etinc.com (et-gw.etinc.com [207.252.1.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8E237B502 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dbsys.etinc.com (dbsys.etinc.com [207.252.1.18]) by etinc.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA09242; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:51:17 GMT (envelope-from dennis@etinc.com) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.19881012105254.02a77070@mail.etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@mail.etinc.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1988 10:55:03 -0400 To: David Scheidt From: Dennis Subject: Re: etherchannel / bonding Cc: Andreas Brodmann , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.0.25.0.20001011160606.02538a90@mail.etinc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 09:01 AM 10/12/2000, David Scheidt wrote: >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Dennis wrote: > >:We will have the feature in our bandwidth manager product for FreeBSD >:shortly, including fallover. Its really load balancing; bonding is a bad >:term (no doubt coined by the linux camp). >: > >It's telco usage from before there was a linux (and probably before >there was a Linus), so it's rather unlikely that they're responsible for >it. No, telcos used the term "bonding" for ISDN, which actually IS a physical bonding technique. Its all the half-wits that think that load balancing is the same thing that now associate virtual techniques to something very different. DB To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message