search for: 2006q2

Hi, After reading section 9 of LARTC it seemed to me that a pure TOS based QoS setup with be sufficient for a small newtork. Interactive packets could have the highest priority, second highest for DNS and small HTTP packets and lowest prio for all others. The advantage is that, the setup would be simply a couple of iptables lines, because the default pfifo_fast qdisc already implements

Hello everybody. I''m running linux 2.6.19 with nth match to alternatively snat outgoing connections to two different ip addresses for load balancing between two adsl lines: Here is: $IPTABLES -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s my_ip --protocol tcp -m multiport --dports 80,443 -m statistic --mode nth --every 2 -j SNAT --to adslA $IPTABLES -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s my_ip --protocol tcp -m multiport

Hi all! After that good thread "DGD patch not detecting dead gateway" I was able to set up a Load Balancing with ping based DGD (without Julian Anastasov patch). But now I''m facing a new problem and tried some options, with only partial solutions. I made a script based on http://www.mail-archive.com/lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl/msg16257.html (Thank you Manish Kathuria),

...eplies to packets coming from WAN1 may go through WAN2. The difference in the two solutions is only in where packets are marked and which packets are marked. Routing is the same. For a detailed discussion on the first approach, you can refer to this thread. http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2006q2/018964.html -----Original Message----- From: Francis Brosnan Blazquez [mailto:francis@aspl.es] Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 5:07 PM To: Salim S I Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Subject: RE: [LARTC] Load balancing using connmark El jue, 10-05-2007 a las 16:01 +0800, Salim S I escribió: Hi Salim, Tha...

The filter -> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol all prio 1 u32 match u8 0x6 0xff at 9 match u32 0xa640105 0xffffffff at 16 offset at 0 mask 0f00 shift 6 eat link 5:0:0 Can anyone please tell me how to change it ? I''ve being searching and trying to make sense of the man pages all day. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

Hi, Is it possible to create a routing rule that depends on the source host/network, besides the target host/network? E.g. route everything from 192.168.0.x to 10.0.0.1, and route everything from 192.168.1.x to 10.0.0.1. TIA -- Groeten, Joost Kraaijeveld Askesis B.V. Molukkenstraat 14 6524NB Nijmegen tel: 024-3888063 / 06-51855277 fax: 024-3608416 web: www.askesis.nl

Ok ive been trying to get this to work for about half a year now. Ive searched all over the internet for a solution for my problem. Ive found some solutions, but they only led me to yet more problems. What we want to do is the following: I live in a student complex with 7 other people. Every room has its own internet connection from the same ISP. Ip, gateway, subnet are asigned through dhcp on

The LARTC howto correctly describes load balancing and split access for traffic from a machine with multiple ISP connections (http://www.lartc.org/lartc.html#LARTC.RPDB.MULTIPLE-LINKS) -- *provided* the traffic originates from the machine itself (i.e. traffic regularly handled by the INPUT and OUTPUT chains of iptables). When forwarding traffic from an attached local network, the following

helo again. I think this question i am asking is worth: we know that pppoe-server creates a pppX device on each connection done to it. So, when i have to shape, i have to shape each pppX connection device on itself alone. What i know is that the borrowing method on one device by itself, e.g. ppp0, alone using HTB or the like. this means that i have to create for another device, e.g. ppp1,

...ntation. I welcome comments and questions, - -Martin [0] http://klaus.geekserver.net/hfsc/hfsc.html [1] http://linux-ip.net/tc/hfsc.en/ [2] http://www.linux-magazin.de/Artikel/ausgabe/2005/02 [3] http://www.linux-magazin.de/Produkte/lms_2006_3.html [4] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2006q2/018857.html [5] http://www.acm.org/sigs/sigcomm/sigcomm97/papers/p011.html - -- Martin A. Brown http://linux-ip.net/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/ iD8DBQFEm+6Fki79Zb8hnmwRAhSdAJ9DXD6ZcD91XLi/Pl7ZWK...

...nswers to my questions. I will keep doing tests and will post more results here. Regards: Pablo [1] http://www.ehas.org/index_html?set_language=en&cl=en [2] http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS.htm [3] http://lartc.org/ [4] http://linux-ip.net/tc/hfsc.en/ [5] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2006q2/018865.html

..., it seems to behave better, doing all marking job at the PREROUTING and OUTPUT. Did anybody find that some packages doesn''t get properly routed according to the mark with the first solution? What you do think about the second solution? Cheers! [1] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2006q2/018964.html [2] http://www.shorewall.net -- Francis Brosnan Blazquez <francis@aspl.es> Advanced Software Production Line, S.L.

HI All , I am running a FC6 box with two internet links with load balance . Every thing is working fine expect the MSN connection that failed and reconnect every time and SSL connections . I would link to know if with the nona howto I could fix that . I have been tried with no success to redirect that connection only to one link but its look like do not work . Here my configuration :

Hi, I have searched the archives on the topic, and it seems that the list gurus favor load balancing to be done in the kernel as opposed to other means. I have been using a home-grown approach, which splits traffic based on `-m statistic --mode random --probability X`, then CONNMARKs the individual connections and the kernel happily routes them. I understand that for > 2 links it will become