On 08/06/16(Wed) 19:51, Sebastian Benoit wrote: > [...] > i dont see why this would be a problem > > however: > > + ... if we were going to use > + * the last available route, but it got removed, we'll hit > + * the end of the list and then pick the first route. > > would this make the first route get more traffic than the others, > statistically?
What do you mean by "statistically"? The comment apply to route lookups done by a CPU while another CPU is modifying the multipath list. This should be a completely negligible amount of lookups. Now assuming that you are voluntarily generating a lot of multipath route changes to trigger this case, what you call "the first" route will most likely be a different route after every change. So it should not matter ;)
