Re: bonding of non-ethernet devices

[Thomas Graf <tgraf redhat com>]

On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 14:26 -0500, Dan Winship wrote:
> Exactly how much "like a virtual ethernet device" is a bond? In
> particular, when you bond two infiniband devices together (or an
> ethernet device and a wifi device, which is supported by the kernel
> according to the internet), is the result still "like a virtual ethernet
> device" in the same way? Is it more like an NMDeviceWired than an
> NMDeviceEthernet?

In terms of the kernel, a bonding master interface is a virtual
ethernet device and any ARPHRD_ETHER device may become a slave.

It supports a carrier and a MAC address (set to the MAC address of
the first slave that provides a MAC address).

> (Which may depend to some extent on questions like
> "would anyone ever run 802.1x over a bond?")

Can't think of a reason why not.