Subject: Re: bonding vs 802.3ad/Cisco EtherChannel link agregation

From: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 14:04:53 -0700 (PDT)

From: Chris Friesen <[email-masked]>
   Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 17:10:06 -0400
   
   Okay, that makes me even more curious why we don't send successive
   packets out successive pipes in a bonded link.

This is not done because it leads to packet reordering which
if bad enough can trigger retransmits.

Scott Feldman's posting mentioned this, as did one other I
think.

Same flows (which in this context means TCP connection) must
go over the same link to avoid packet reordering at the receiver.