search for: aspenview

Hi, I am tring to us ip route to load balance between two interfaces. ip route add equalize 10.200.1.0/24 nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta2 Where neta and neta2 are gre tunnels. Testing show that packets travel in a single sided manner. Do I need to use the multipath (IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED) module? thx jason

Hi Guys, I would just like to have advice and pointers of the best way would be, Someting like BGP or OSPF? I have 2 internet connections at diffrent locations. let say connection A and B 1.) router A has a fast internet connection and a seperate interface for clients using /lan/pppoe/ipsec etc and another ethernet interface going to router B 2.) router B has similiar setup as router A and

Hi, below are some test results from implementing a prio qdisc ''that is also below''. The qdisc is attacted to a vlan interface for my external network. Both tests were run at the same time. The links are policed at 6.0M ''by our provider''. 192.168.70.1 --> 192.168.30.1 My question is: If using a prio qdisc should''nt the iperf run with a tos of b8 have

Hi, how do you nat an address pool that is routed to a router but the router does not have/contain that network. For example: [isp 1.2.3.4] ----------[customer router 1.2.3.5]----->[dmz network] [route for 200.0.0.0/x get sent to customer router this address pool is assigned to customer, the isp is routing all 200.0.0.0/x to customer router] I would like to map address 200.0.0.x/32 to

Hi, how does gre tunnels handle the TOS/DS field in the encapsulated packet? Is the value copied to the encapsulating ip header? thx jason _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have two systems each with 2 two gre tunnels over ipsec. The tunnels are setup to loadbalance using ''ip route''. Using ping from one server to the other I get equal results via the two gre tunnels, but when I try a large ftp transfer the utilization of one tunnel is 90% and the other 10%. The two interfaces are both 100/full. What would be the reason for this, or would

Hi, I have 2 routers that are connected using 2 gre tunnels over ipsec, and ospf. Ospf sets up the equal cost route, but uses the ''equalize'' in the route. Is there a way to remove/disable packet based load balancing? I would just like to do a flow based load balance? thx jason _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

Hi, is there any way to route traffic between 2 ECMP routes dependent on the current utilization(packet loss/bandwidth)? For example using OSPF on 2 linux routers with ECMP gre tunnels between them. If the bandwidth on one tunnel starts to exceed a given value the "mechanism" will start sending traffice to the other interface. thx jason _______________________________________________

Hi, I have setup a ECMP route between two linux systems. I do not have the equalize enabled. This would be flow based. After sending a few ftp/scp sessions I noticed that the ''per flow based'' was jumping between interfaces for just one session. My question is, would this be a result of the routing cache changing between the two ECMP systems. If this is the case would

Hi, what would be the easiest way to mark packets for AF. For example ingress www traffic being marked as AF31? thx jason _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Hi, I am tring to setup AF on my router using GRED/HTB. I plan to mark and set the DSCP with iptables and the ingress qdisc to set the tc_index for the proper GRED vq(1-12). My question is: Is there a way to allow for priority between the af classes and within the af classes? also would it be possible to to the following: HTB(6Mb) | GRED(1)grio HTB1 (af1) (1MB) GRED(1-3)grio |

Hi, just wondering if this type of configuration would be possible for using AF and EF classes. HTB (6.0M) --GRED 5 (AF1) --HTB(1M) [is it possible to have this with a 1M rate and a 6M ceiling?] --GRED [3 greds using grio] VQ1 -3 --GRED 4 (AF2) --HTB(1M) --GRED VQ1 -3 --GRED 3 (AF3) --HTB(1M)

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I am trying to get assured forwarding/expedited forwarding with gred and htb working. Below is the script I am using. The following steps are what I thing is how the script works. My problem is that if I remove the HTB qdisc from the script and have the GREDS parent as the dsmark it works, but when I add the htb as a parent of GRED and DSmark the parent of htb it does not work? Any