From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 25 19:52:51 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BAC21065670 for ; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 19:52:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-net@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46218FC0C for ; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 19:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PWaAa-0007S7-Cs for freebsd-net@freebsd.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:52:48 +0100 Received: from 212.15.189.9 ([212.15.189.9]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:52:48 +0100 Received: from ivoras by 212.15.189.9 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:52:48 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:52:30 +0100 Lines: 9 Message-ID: References: <4D0CFEFF.3000902@rdtc.ru> <1292844095.1917.136.camel@stormi> <4D1083D6.6010707@rdtc.ru> <84530C06-AC2E-4E2B-BFD4-693902BB0FA6@netasq.com> <4D10B2F4.1060404@rdtc.ru> <90F64F73-F9A8-4FD6-9303-2FC0D3424751@netasq.com> <4D10BE3E.6030506@rdtc.ru> <4D123B7C.1070104@rdtc.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.15.189.9 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <4D123B7C.1070104@rdtc.ru> Subject: Re: lagg/lacp poor traffic distribution X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 19:52:51 -0000 On 22.12.2010 18:55, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > It seems, we really need sysctl disabling lagg's use of flows, don't we? If no developer is willing to work on it right now, you should probably create a PR with your patch so it doesn't get lost. Also, a patch describing the sysctl in the lagg(4) man page would probably get it committed faster :)