Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 16:17:43 -0500 From: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com>, wpaul@FreeBSD.ORG (Bill Paul) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: call for testers: port aggregation netgraph module Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010310161340.01fda9a0@mail.etinc.com> In-Reply-To: <200103102042.f2AKgjC03194@aslan.scsiguy.com> References: <Your message of "Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:25:09 PST." <20010208212509.E8D7D37B6AA@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:42 PM 03/10/2001, Justin T. Gibbs wrote: > >Each link is checked once every second to see if the link is still up. > >An attempt to send a packet over a dead link will cause the packet to > >be shifted over to the next link in the bundle. > >Any chance this can be done through an async event rather >than by polling? I've been meaning to ask about this...is there a reason that ethernet drivers dont call if_up and if_down like serial drivers on cable events? This is needed for load balancing so that the UP flag can be used instead of polling or an event. Of course a polling protocol is needed also. Dennis To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.0.0.25.0.20010310161340.01fda9a0>