* Gert Doering <[email protected]> > (active/passive linux bonding would work well for us, while LACP > wouldn't due to conscious design decision to de-couple control planes > of primary/secondary switches)
Active/passive fail-over à la Linux bonding would work for me too. The biggest disadvantage of that is that you waste half your available bandwidth, but that probably isn't a big deal for the Atlas Anchors. It is quite possible to create a setup that does 802.3ad if an LACP neighbour is detected, falling back on active/passive fail-over if not. That said, you do lose most of the error detection capabilities of LACP that way. Quite possibly not worth the engineering effort if it's not already implemented in whatever software you're using. I'd rather you spent that time implementing LLDP support, come to think of it. (That would be useful on the non-Anchor probes as well.) Tore
