On 01/01/16(Fri) 11:30, Ted Unangst wrote: > If you're trying to utilize multiple links for aggregation, etc., you have to > ensure that the packets get hashed differently. Currently we use MAC address > and IP address, but not port numbers. This makes it challenging to connect two > servers unless you jump through some hoops and assign multiple IPs, and > you're still left with the challenge of balancing across IPs, which will not > be the default behavior for most clients. Adding the port numbers into the mix > means each connection still goes over a single link, but at least if I use ftp > to download two files, there's a chance they will be on separate links. > > As far as I know, this is mostly within spec. There's some question of how it > handles fragments, but practically speaking I expect fragments to be rare? I > didn't find previous discussion of adding this to trunk, so I thought I'd > bring it up. Diff below is poc, could also do udp/ipv6/etc.
I don't think it makes sense to continue tweaking the trunk hash logic until somebody really investigate the performance cost of this function, especially since it has been converted to use SipHash24.
