search for: nexthops

I have question about multipath routing. I am running a 2.6.7 kernel (gentoo). I have a route with three nexthops on the same interface. I see a different nexthop being picked for different destination addresses. All is fine. Now if one of the nexthop goes down (arp entry times out and arp request doesnt get a response), does it remove the nexthop from contention and only use the remaining two from this point...

Hello lartc! I have strange problem setting load balancing over 4 interfaces. Something won''t accept more than 3 interfaces, While setting: ip route add default scope global \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc0 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc1 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc2 weight 1 It''s ok: ip r l default nexthop dev pvc0

I have looked through the archives, and I can''t find the answer(not that it isn''t there) I have two connections to the net. I want load balancing and redundancy. cable adsl (24.141.) (64.229) | | | | | | | | ------------ | linux | |redhat 7.0| I have no idea were to even start. I would like equal access to both connections.

...Y.Y.Y, no matter what I do. I can increase the weight of X.X.X.X, load and unload the various multipath kernel modules (_rr, _random, _wrandom, and _drr), flush the cache routing table, delete and re-add the route, but still traffic is only sent to X.X.X.X If I reverse the order of the nexthops on the command line, that is: ip route add table 101 default \ nexthop via Y.Y.Y.Y nexthop via X.X.X.X ...the behaviour is exactly the same, only now the traffic is sent only to X.X.X.X. The ordering of the nexthops on the command line is the only thing that appears to make a...

Hi all :) there is somekind of strange Routing problem that im getting with Linux-2.6.16 and iproute 2.6.16 , when i use command like : ip route add default nexthop via 1.1.1.1 dev eth0 nexthop via 1.1.1.2 dev eth1 all packets goes on 1.1.1.2 ( always last interface ) , whats is the problem ? this situation also tested with equalize flag , on two physical interface and etc ... -- Lady Luck

Hi, I get de following error messages in the logfile: var/log/tinc.ci1070300036.log:2011-08-16 14:12:54 tinc.ci1070300036[10834]: Possible node with same Name as us! Sleeping 10 seconds. I know that i don't have duplicate node names. But i see some strange node names: Al my node names start with ci but there is a node a did not create my self, and that is ca1070300036 How can i remove

Hi I''m trying to monitor my multi ISP shorewall with swping, the script works fine, i can see in log when an ISP is down, the script restart shorewall and /etc/shorewall/isusable is called, however in the swping log after the shorewall restart i see again a route by ISP (even the ISP down), is it normal ? should i not see one route less? shorewall version 4.4.5.4-1. ****

Hi, I am new in LARTC list. I had intermediate skills in networking. What I tried to do: Use 2 links with loadsharing + falt toletant (to add bandwitdh) ok ! I am use Debian Etch in router/fw With kernel debian default + routes-2.6.17-12.diff patch The Problem: The iproute2 just route thought the last gateway of nexthop rule. I was running tcpdump in 2 terminals, tcpdump -nni eth0 ...

Hello, We have debian with 2.4.19-pre8 kernel We active the load balancing with two ethernets to internet, wih the command: ip rule add from 128.1.3.1/32 lookup host_proxy preference 2060 ip route add default table host_proxy proto static nexthop via 80.25.175.1 dev eth0 \ nexthop via 212.170.14.1 dev eth1 when see the route

hi, I''ve a dedicated internet link 512k with a cisco router, and now, I want to upgrade bandwidth with 8 ADSLs (512k each) then: - build kernel 2.4.27 with pachs: - patch-o-matic-ng-20040621 : CONNMARK, H323, etc... - http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/#multigw Julian''s patch. - Activate "equal cost multi path" (Advanced Router-Networking Options) and so on -

...n help. I currently have 2 ADSL modems, provided by the same ISP and terminating on the same gateway (I think having the same gateway is what is causing the problems, since the nexthop is always the same for each interface). I''ve tried using equal cost multipath (using ip route to set two nexthops with equal weights). Problem is I believe this uses route lookups to determine which interface to use, and thus for sending data to common destinations it only ever uses 1 interface. Does anyone know if its even possible to send packets over each interface "equally"? I read somewhere t...

Hello, We have 3 DSL connections connected to eth3 and another interface with a dedicated link in eth0 (main table) We want to balance selected traffic (using fwmark and iptables) through our 3 DSL connections in a secondary table named DSL (without using the dedicated link in eth0), but the next command is not accepted, and gives us the following error: # ip route add default

Hi, I am currently using a 2.4 kernel with multipath routing patch v5 to send outgoing packets in a 1:1 ratio over two lines, however the lines do not actually have equal upstream bandwidth, one has 800kbit and the other 600kbit, so ideally I would like to send packets in a 4:3 ratio, is there anything in 2.6 or a patch for 2.4 that could be used to do that? I tried this ugly hack but it

I''ve applied julian''s paches to a 2.6.14 gentoo kernel with the appropiate options enabled, and i''m using a modified version of the mpath2.sh script also available on julian''s site http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/ Overall everything works nearly perfectly. Incomming connections to either the fios (PPPoE) connection, or cable modem get routed back out correctly. The

Hello Everyone, Hope everyone is doing well. First off I would like to say that Lartc has been an invaluable source of information for me, I was looking for a solution and a bit of google''ing found this wonderful HOW-TO. So now down to the Question: I have three Internet connections, (Soon to be four if I can get this working) ETH0 - 2mb/2mb ETH1 - 7mb/1mb ETH2 - 7mb/1mb I wish

Hello Everyone, I configured a server for a friend's Internet cafe. He has 2 ISPs. Here is what I did: ## NAT -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.128 -o eth2 -j SNAT --to-source 82.77.148.83 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.128 -o eth0 -j SNAT --to-source 83.103.190.175 ## Removing default routing /sbin/ip rule add prio 50 table main /sbin/ip route del default table main ##

Dear Alexey, Sorry to bother you with this small question about nexthop syntax failing, but I haven''t found anyone else who can answer it - including Matthew Marsh or those on the lartc mailing list. The problem, with 2.2.19 and 2.2.20 kernels and versions of iproute2 up to iproute2-2.2.4-now-ss001007 (the most recent that compiles for me), is that this command does not work: # ip ro

Hi, I'm wanting to configure a CentOS 6 server to have a fall-back default route via a second network interface. Given: - eth0 with 192.168.0.10 on subnet 192.168.0.0/24 gateway 192.168.0.1 - eth1 with 192.168.1.10 on subnet 192.168.1.0/24 gateway 192.168.1.1 Where eth0's network is a "back door" to the internet, and eth1's is the "front door", I believe I can

Hi, We want to deploy a tinc VPN, with more than 50 sites connected all arround the world. But we cannot trust all our sites with the same level, so the tinc solution (automatic full mesh) is "too automatic" for us : *any* node can add a new node which will be connected directly to others. A solution could be TLS (signing public keys), but create a PKI is another issue for us.

Hi Ppl I have 5 adsl lines that after reading quite a bit i managed to get load balanced now abvoiusly it doesnt load balance evenly and this works on what routes are still in the routing cache. my question is my outbound masquerading had to be modified to use snat in iptables instead of just plain masquerading my outbound masquerading now works but my inbound port forwarding doesnt work would