donikatz wrote:
donikatz wrote: It doesn't have logic to know which is more loaded and to actively balance, but because it distributes the load across multiple rather than sticking with one, it de facto provides this balance.
I would not say that it does, not in the sense that it is in some fundamental way better than Port-ID. Both methods does in effect randomly distribute the overall network traffic across several NICs without caring or adjusting for actual load.
You could be unlucky with Port ID and have two VMs with high network IO on the same pNIC, but the very same is very likely with IP hash, not the least when you just use two active pNICs.
donikatz wrote:
donikatz wrote: whereas with IP Hash that peak would be randomly distributed.
It is in practise randomly distributed, but in theory based on an algorithm which will always put the same IP endpoints on the same pNIC. So for any workload that could actually drive large amount of network IO for some time, perhaps a backup, it is still a risk for this traffic from several VMs to go through the same pNIC.