search for: onlink

...92.168.0.33 192.168.0.96/27 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.97 192.168.0.64/27 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.65 192.168.0.128/27 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.129 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link default nexthop via 192.168.0.126 dev eth2 weight 1 dead onlink nexthop via 192.168.0.61 dev eth0 weight 1 ----------------------------- Is normal the part of "dead onlink" ? Is it balancing the load between both internet providers? Sorry for my English. I''m from Argentine. Thanks in advance. ______________________________________________...

Greetings routing folks, I want to use the netmask 255.255.255.255 to insulate (not quite isolate) machines on a shared subnet from each other. This works just fine on win XP, but Linux iproute will not acccept the gateway address in one step -- neither on the command line nor via DHCP: Here''s the interface, set up with a netmask of /32: # ip addr ... 2: eth0:

Hello all, Tomas Bonnedahl and I recently corresponded about a rather odd behaviour with routes in ancillary routing tables. We both receive a "Network is unreachable" error when we try to add gatewayed routes to ancillary tables and the main routing table does not contain an entry for the gateway IP. It seems that unless a route to the gateway IP exists in the main routing table, I

...een the two linux boxes to give the internal network access to the internet outside the metropolitan network. the setup on linux box 1: ip tun add tun0 mode ipip ttl 64 local a.b.c.d remote x.y.z.v ip addr add 172.16.0.1/32 dev tun0 ip link set tun0 up ip ro add 172.16.0.2/32 via x.y.z.v dev tun0 onlink Then : table main contains no default route. ip ru add pref 10 lookup main ip ro add metro_dest via my_local_gateway dev extf table metro ... as many as needed ip ru add pref 100 lookup metro Up to here I have local directly connected networks and the metropolitan network reachable This is fo...

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

...metric 1 I enabled ip_forward and set arp_ignore to 1 for eth0 and eth1 to make sure the correct nic answers to arp requests. I tried to get the egress load balancing to work by replacing the above two default routes with: ip route add default mpath drr nexthop via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0 weight 1 onlink nexthop via 10.0.0.1 dev eth1 weight 1 onlink I assumed that with mpath device round robin both nics would be used more or less equally, but the reality is only one of the nics actually works and the second nic even stops responding to arp requests. Am I doing something totally wrong or impossi...

Hi. I''ve got here the following configuration: (turn on fixed pitch font to be able to see the scheme in a more accurately way) Client machines <-----> ADSL Router 1 <-----> INTERNET (192.168.0.0/24) (192.168.0.229) NAT Client machines <-----> ADSL Router 1 <-----> INTERNET (192.168.1.0/24) (192.168.1.229) NAT [if doesn''t really

...erver.org/~julian/nano.txt, The problem is; when i try to connect to Internet form gateway machine it;s success , but only one interface is active, no load balancing at all , This is my default table #ip r ls table DEF default proto static nexthop via 172.16.0.1 dev eth0 weight 256 dead onlink pervasive nexthop via 192.168.0.1 dev eth1 weight 1 I search the list about this error, and found that i shall use the upgrade version of iproute2, and i compile that too. but with same config, and new iproute2 i can''t connect to internet now. please be advice, what wrong with my...

I have 2 DCs at a customer that also run ISC-Kea-DHCP servers. To be able to provide DHCP-Leases I added virtual interfaces to the servers with IPs in each VLAN. In turn there also exist routes to the VLANs: # ip r default via 10.0.0.254 dev enp0s31f6 onlink 10.0.0.0/24 dev enp0s31f6 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.0.230 10.100.40.0/24 dev enp0s31f6.200 proto kernel scope link src 10.100.40.230 192.168.101.0/24 dev enp0s31f6.101 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.101.230 192.168.102.0/24 dev enp0s31f6.102 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.102.230...

...red are, # A network ip route add 192.168.1.0/24 dev eth0 src 192.168.1.2 table main ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 table main ip rule add from 192.168.1.2 table main # B network ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 dev eth1 src 192.168.2.2 table router ip route add default via 192.168.2.1 dev eth1 onlink table router ip rule add from 192.168.2.2 table router And last, I''ve also tried to "-j MARK" those packets going to "--dport 10080" and add a rule like: ip rule add fwmark <number> table router But it didn''t work either. Why the connection is not a...

...d 00:00:00:00:00:00:00 9: ax0: <BROADCAST,UP> mtu 256 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 10 link/ax25 ac:8a:62:88:a4:8e:10 brd a2:a6:a8:40:40:40:60 inet 44.135.34.201/24 brd 44.135.34.255 scope global ax0 -------------- next part -------------- 44.137.28.48 via 62.238.66.67 dev tunl0 proto static onlink 24.224.173.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 24.224.173.220 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.1 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link 44.0.0.0/8 via 24.138.74.225 dev tunl0 proto static onlink default via 24.224.173.1 dev eth0 -------------- next part -----...

...lifetime: 1800 Reachable time: 30 Retrans time: 0 ICMPv6 options Type: 5 (MTU) Length: 8 bytes (1) MTU: 1480 ICMPv6 options Type: 3 (Prefix information) Length: 32 bytes (4) Prefix length: 64 Flags: 0xc0 1... .... = Onlink .1.. .... = Auto ..0. .... = Not router address ...0 .... = Not site prefix Valid lifetime: 0x00278d00 Preferred lifetime: 0x00093a80 Prefix: 3ffe:80ee:2ee:1300:: axxem.hide:~# ifconfig tun0 tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MUL...

...1 tcp 6 3 TIME_WAIT src=44.135.34.201 dst=44.135.85.30 sport=1557 dport=23 src=44.135.85.30 dst=44.135.34.201 sport=23 dport=1557 [ASSURED] use=1 --- Ted Gervais Coldbrook Nova Scotia Canada B4R1A7 -------------- next part -------------- 44.137.28.48 via 62.238.66.67 dev tunl0 proto static onlink 24.224.173.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 24.224.173.220 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.1 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link 44.0.0.0/8 via 24.138.74.225 dev tunl0 proto static onlink default via 24.224.173.1 dev eth0 -------------- next part -----...

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