From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Mar 29 02:32:03 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93FE7171
 for <freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 02:32:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ve0-x230.google.com (mail-ve0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5208B75D
 for <freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 02:32:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ve0-f176.google.com with SMTP id db11so3349304veb.35
 for <freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=K23lRDLMjBEyVPQ/J7c4qXpoidANUICtwFaj77XjOkk=;
 b=stiS/Zn6OtNaCAtfgHpJEZn6Bu1YnZ++/0wt6A8PGq9l6H2pLZOT/jtnRoCKHLr+yc
 qciJT8Bn9CE6xLwfrrolprcDkOtpHB55VWz6sYv4+tEsA2jngquL0+NRZh3EnCqw1ube
 7h5msat5yFchNlwJb/0e7OW50muPrcwCpkkOkjW/kUXeEFohRJkELIrfY2ud+cR1CV7p
 QSFFzUDNO4T6YDIR5dn4S4PSyf/awvpjDJiUeNWx2nbrBZbF0djT87oFqiHZK9mWJOSF
 gKK9vYZV5EoJF3TjWpUQbqJH/TZljv8V01ypOM2RhJS54tP9VpWYBHkH0rsLTJGHu3/p
 L3kw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.238.35 with SMTP id vh3mr10133592vec.16.1396060321789;
 Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.239.84 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJB2g-FKyFbO4wvkOUL=2nQk=v1Y3816sJnUcj-2O2YMk5hThg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJB2g-FKyFbO4wvkOUL=2nQk=v1Y3816sJnUcj-2O2YMk5hThg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 22:32:01 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB7-odmc7VVBTRDANJtd2c2KsvVr_SizoEOLzHTDgw+1t_CFeg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Possible mistake on handbook - Section 30.7: Link Aggregation
From: Thomas Hoffmann <trh411@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17
Cc: Rafael Possamai <rafael@gav.ufsc.br>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Documentation project <freebsd-doc.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-doc>,
 <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>,
 <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 02:32:03 -0000

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Rafael Possamai <rafael@gav.ufsc.br> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I was reading the handbook and stumbled upon the following sentence:
>
> "Failover allows traffic to continue to flow even if an interface becomes
> available."
>
>
> In my understanding it should say unavailable, as if one of the links was
> no longer passing traffic, therefore the failover feature redirects traffic
> to the remaining interface that is active.
>
> The webpage is the following:
>
> http://www5.us.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.html
>
>
> Thank you for all the hard work on FreeBSD.
>
>
> Cordially,
> Rafael


Also, does "an interface" convey what we need here? For any given N-way
aggregation, can't we have N-1 (one or more, but not all) interfaces become
unavailable and still have a working link?

-Tom