Channel-bonding 2.2 vs 2.4?

[R C]

> 
> 4) Someone else on the list wrote:
> 
> From: R C <zarquon at zarq.dhs.org>
>   >As you found out, the HPs don't support duplicate NATs on seperate 

Arg.. This is supposed to be 'duplicate MACs'.  Sorry.

>   >VLANs (even states this in the manual, but I had to dig to find it).
>   >At that point I borrowed the lab switch and hooked it in.  Using
>   >2.4.x, and 2 channels, I got about 160-170 Mbps with an Intel eepro100
>   >(onboard) and an Adaptec duralan (starfire?) card.  The adaptec
>   >tended to hiccup and give "Something Wicked Happened!" during full
>   >speed tests, but rarely pulled down below 150 Mbps.
>   >
>   >Tests were done using ttcp, linux 2.4.4?, and Dell server boxes
>   >(dual 500, 512MB).
> 
>    I noticed that he was using the 2.4 kernel and Scyld was still
>    using 2.2.  I started to wonder if there were bonding issues with
>    the 2.2 kernel.  I decided to take Scyld out of the equation and
>    using 2 linux boxes with the 2.4.7 kernel (with a mandrake base):
>