Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:27:55 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Florent Thoumie <flz@xbsd.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux/FreeBSD Channel Bonding Interoperability Message-ID: <429766AB.6070803@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <1117197753.2458.23.camel@ft-laptop.int.celeste.fr> References: <1117197753.2458.23.camel@ft-laptop.int.celeste.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
probably this would be better in net@freebsd.org Florent Thoumie wrote: > Hey list. > > I'm advocating for FreeBSD for about 6 months now where I'm > working and they have the project to build their own router > (which will probably be based on WRAP). > > The good point is that the actual solution is running Linux > but it's not highly reliable. The bad point is that they're > using channel bonding (on both peers) and they don't want to > change one (or at least the system it runs). > > I've read about ng_fec and ng_onetomany, so I know channel > bonding is quite easy (seems so, according to web pages I've > found) but I guess FreeBSD and Linux won't work correctly. > If that's the case, I wondered if it could be much aspossible to add a > new node to "translate" stuff so that both could communicate > correctly. > > how you do it depends entirely on how they are doing the bonding in Linux. you do not give any clues as to what modules they are using. > This can be a dumb idea, really I've no idea since I don't know > anything about netgraph and bonding. > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?429766AB.6070803>