similar to: routing using iproute2 nexthop

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 ...

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

I have two internet lines and I want to do equal cost loadbalancing on the two uplinks to the internet. This is what I do: ip route add 200.200.200.0/24 dev eth2 table 200 ip route add default via 200.200.200.254 dev eth2 table 200 ip route add 100.100.100.0/24 dev eth1 table 100 ip route add default via 100.100.100.254 dev eth1 table 100 ip route add 200.200.200.0/24 src 200.200.200.1 dev eth2

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, We have two internet connections and I would like to loadbalance between the two using advanced routing. The gateway machine to my lan has two interfaces, one connected to lan(eth0) and other to wan (eth1). The wan side interface is connected to a switch which is terminated with two internet connections from two ISPs. I have added the routes as follows, ip route add default scope

I am relatively new to iproute2. Any information on the topic below would save me considerable time. I appreciate any help, thanks. We want to plug two lines into a webserver to increase the bandwidth available to the hosted sites. Rather than use round-robin DNS we would prefer to use iproute2 to use equal cost routing across the two lines. However, I am still not sure how well that will

Hi, i''m trying to do loadbalancing with a linux embedded with a MIPS procesor, but I''m in trouble. I have the kernel 2.4.20, and iproute2 ss010824. I compiled without errors, but when I executed the ip comand to install de mutipath default route I get the following error (all the previous commands have been executed according to the LARTC-HOWTO in section 4.2): linux# ip route

Hi all, i have a problem i have this topology 192.168.1.7 GW 192.168.2.252 link 1 ------------------------------------ link 2 | | eth1 PROXY eth0 192.168.1.245 192.168.2.245 The default gw of the PROXY is 192.168.1.7 and the link2 is a Secondary link that i need to go out to internet!!!! My internal IP of the network is

Hi, it has been days now that i am looking for a maybe non existent patch for kernel 2.6.x , currently run 2.6.9 for the equalize option in iproute i use : /sbin/ip route add default scope global equalize nexthop dev ppp0 nexthop dev ppp1 have one pptp link and another pppoe i am monitoring the 2 links and what i see is that for multiplie connections to the same destination it does not split

Hello folks, Unfortunately I have to add 2 users on 200 servers that do not have centralized authentication or sudo or the same room password. I tried doing this with expect and "su -" but the script fails or acts funny. Please advise me or tell me where I need to look... Thanks and regards, Bazy

Hi William. Thanks a lot for your help. Im having some trouble recompiling my kernel after a installed the patch. Im running RH 7.3 with kernel 2.4.18-3. The patch I installed is routes-2.4.16-6.diff. I got no errors installing it. I added the multipath support, and recompiled it. The make dep and the make bzImage went fine. I got error during the make modules. These are the errors:

Hello guys! I have the following setup: Linux router acting as a gateway for several subnets in the LAN. The subnets are: 127.17.0.0/16 (will go out via NAT) 195.229.x.x/24 193.289.y.y/28 213.189.z.z/26 etc. There are about 20 subnets including the private Class B subnet. I want to mark the packets that will go on the Internet, and leave out the packets that move from one subnet to the

I am running 2.4.20 with Julian Anastasov''s patches (routes-2.4.20-9.diff), iptables v1.2.6a, iproute2-ss010824 on Debian. I have set up our internal gateway to multihome 2 T1''s as described in http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~julian/nano.txt . The only difference is that I use multiple IP''s on the external interfaces. EXA A.B.C.225 --------------------

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, 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 -

Hello, I''m trying to achieve the following. 2 ISP''s and 1 LAN with failover. So, when 1 internet connection fails the other need to take over. I''m aware of the restrictions. The current sessions are lost. I did this before, one and a half year ago or something. But at that router wasn''t failover. Now i''ve read the nano howto and followed it.

(found on dslr voip forum) http://www.freephoneproject.com/nexthop/ I think this is pretty cool. not too sure how stable/durable though, at least not until there are a lot more nodes providing service. also unsure of the legality vs. your average telco's consumer tos, but it's definitely not reselling. jeff pulver (crom bless him) seemed to be fairly amused, stuff like this fits

I''m using a 2.6.20-15-ubuntu (shipped with feisty) kernel with Julian''s patches applied and it''s my 3rd day with tc, ip, ifconfig and the rest ;). Got 2 ADSL uplinks. What I need is an ability to manually configure uplink usage, so nothing like bonding by default. Failover is meant to be provided via a shell script at the next step. Here is my config: == # no need for

-------------------- ---------------------- | SDSL 1 | | SDSL 2 | -------------------- ---------------------- \ / eth1 \ / eth2 \ / *---*---*---*---*---*---* | Linux Router/Server |

Hi everyone, I have a linux-box connected to an internal LAN and two ADSL-connections. I am using the nano.txt setup with patches applied, and everything is working fine. My problem is that I want to route traffic to some specific hosts (DNS and mail-servers) to a specific ADSL-line. I have tried to add the following ip route add 195.82.195.0/24 dev eth0 src 83.72.197.108 proto static table