search for: ecmp

Hello, does anybody know if quagga for CentOS 5.3 is compiled with -enable-multipath? I want to implement ECMP over 2 ISP. Thanks, Cristi Carstea

Hi - I am trying to find a Linux based solution for one of my clients, I want to bond two adsl lines into one, with redundancy (if one fails the other does all the work). I''ve been looking into ECMP (Equal Cost Multipath), I know BGP would work, but something like ECMP would be much simpler. I have full control of both ends of the connections and I can have both ADSL lines terminate in the same router on each end. I guess my question for the list is; is ECMP a solution for this? I know it doe...

Hi, With kernel 2.4 I was able to use equalize to send our outgoing packets to two different routers (our isp supports this setup), like this: ip route add default src ip.a.dd.rr equalize nexthop via <router1> weight 1 nexthop via <router2> weight 1 The two routes were used equally on a per packet basis, not per flow or per cached route, but per packet, each line has 800k upload

Hi, I have a linux server running kernel 2.6.19 that is connected with 2 seperate 100Mbit links to the same isp: +---+ +---------------+ | I | +---------------+ | | | S | | | | eth0 --+--------------+ P | | |

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...

...proprietary wireless back haul). The other connection is PPPoE ADSL via the local phone company. (I think) I am wanting to use equal cost multi path routing to try to utilize both of these connections. After reading some other information I''m not entirely sure that I do want to use ECMP routing. However, this is out side of this discussion. To utilize ECMP routing, you need two or more static upstream gateways. The problem is that one of my upstream gateways is dynamic via PPPoE. Thus I do not have two static default routes to add via the "ip route ... nexthop ...&q...

OK, I spammed the mailing list recently, but I will be fired if I can''t solve the problem today. (just kidding, but I did waste lots of time on it :( ) The common configuration for teql is for two computers connected directly with two links. My topology is a little different: one link is connected directly, but the other is connected through a gateway. My problem is teql can''t

I am developing load balancing router, But I have a question about fail over. The follow diagram is my test environment and scripts. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Environment Setting PC1(192.168.10.2) | (LAN) | PC2-eth2(192.168.10.1) +

...dev IFE1 \ nexthop via GWE2 dev IFE2 The author explains the kernel chooses both the interfaces alternately (weight being 1 for both). Can anyone please elaborate this, like how the kernel will decide this??? Will it decide using any hash functions??? Is this kind of loadbalancing similar to ECMP (Equal cost multi path). Please let me know.. Thanks, Joy --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

...: sn1 - rt1 100mbit sn2 - rt2 100mbit rt1 - rt2 - rt3 10mbit now there are multiple flows from sn1 to sn2. if the load on the prefered link (rt1-rt2) is 80% or more i want to utilisize the rt1-rt3-rt2 route as well. but only in this case - not normaly. so i think ecmp with weights is not the solution to this. anyone out there who can point me in the right direction? thanx in advance bye bye birger _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Before I start, I don''t want to do ECMP or simple bonding ... I have multiple Internet connections available to multiple boxes on one of my networks. Box A connects to ISPs 1, 2 and 3 Box B connects to ISPs 1 and 4 Boxes A and B are both connected to each other and the rest of the network. 1) I would like to set up some dynamic routi...

(I know that what I''m wanting to do can be done, but for some reason I can not get it to work for the life of me. I think I have been staring at it too long and too closely.) I have two different internet connections from two cooperating ISPs. I also have a small 8 block of IPs that are globally routable that both ISPs will route to me via my world facing globally routable IPs that

...tification); > > append: > return skb_append_datato_frags(sk, skb, getfrag, from, > I thought about mixing in the incoming interface identifier into the frag id generation, but that could hurt us badly as soon as a VM has more than one interface to the outside world and uses e.g. ECMP. We need to make sure that those frag ids are unique and the kernel needs to be better than just using a random number generator. Bye, Hannes

...tification); > > append: > return skb_append_datato_frags(sk, skb, getfrag, from, > I thought about mixing in the incoming interface identifier into the frag id generation, but that could hurt us badly as soon as a VM has more than one interface to the outside world and uses e.g. ECMP. We need to make sure that those frag ids are unique and the kernel needs to be better than just using a random number generator. Bye, Hannes

Hi. I''ve trying to balance outgoing traffic by using multipath routes, but I can''t get it to work. Only one of the routes are used. I''m adding the route like this: ip route add table 101 default \ nexthop via X.X.X.X nexthop via Y.Y.Y.Y It shows up the routing table like this: default nexthop via X.X.X.X dev vlan110 weight 1

...skb_append_datato_frags(sk, skb, getfrag, from, > >> > > > > I thought about mixing in the incoming interface identifier into the > > frag id generation, but that could hurt us badly as soon as a VM has > > more than one interface to the outside world and uses e.g. ECMP. We need > > to make sure that those frag ids are unique and the kernel needs to be > > better than just using a random number generator. > > > > So the goal behind this series of patches is to restore VM functionality to > pre-916e4cf46d0204 ("ipv6: reuse ip6_frag_...

...skb_append_datato_frags(sk, skb, getfrag, from, > >> > > > > I thought about mixing in the incoming interface identifier into the > > frag id generation, but that could hurt us badly as soon as a VM has > > more than one interface to the outside world and uses e.g. ECMP. We need > > to make sure that those frag ids are unique and the kernel needs to be > > better than just using a random number generator. > > > > So the goal behind this series of patches is to restore VM functionality to > pre-916e4cf46d0204 ("ipv6: reuse ip6_frag_...

I am setting up 2 Vyatta routers that will serve as redundant failover core routers out to the backbone of our ISP. They will be serving for routing between other branches and the ISP and bandwidth management. I am trying to differentiate between the plethora of information about having redundant, automatic failover routers and pretty much decided on VRRP for the IP address failover mechanism. I

Hi all I have installed vyatta system, (vyatta-livecd-vc4-alpha2.iso ) on top of Centos5. Our system requirement is, * Centos 5.1 (2.6.18-92.1.10.el5xen ) * 2 Gb RAM, * x86_64 And cpu information is as follow, [root at turtle4 ~]# cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 15 model : 107 model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core