(In reply to Jamie Bainbridge from comment #4)
> > Under no circumstances should Modes 0, 3, 5, or 6 be used.
> I assume this comes from the RHEV documentation?
> There is some discrepancy between what RHEV decided to allow for guest
> networks and what actually works. The knowledgebase solution I wrote
> (https://access.redhat.com/solutions/67546) lists 0 and 3 as working, a view
> which former bonding maintainer vfalico supported (Bug 1097312).
This discrepancy should be fixed on RHEV side. IICR vfalico and jpirko asked to block modes 0 5 6 when bridges are connected when discussion multiple customer tickets due their usage.
If mode 0 can actually be enabled (with caveats) by the platform, I suppose RHEV should enable it as well.
Karen, is this the current wisdom? mode 0 is good for us?
Amnon's networking team will be able to answer. Thanks.
WRT to bond mode 0:
Bonding mode-0 requires manual configuration on the switch that all bond members
are connected to. The switch configuration requires all ports to be added to a single LAG (or EtherChannel) because the bond will use the same source mac on
each bond member, and without LAG on the switch, the flow will bounce between multiple ports causing unreachability.
This requirement for manual switch configuration is the reason that we do not recommend bond mode 0 being used.
The changes wrt to bonding modes look fine to me.
Published on December 17 version 2-24