similar to: bonding of 2 lines

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "bonding of 2 lines"

2000 Oct 10
3
TEQL: 2 Mbit eth1 + 2Mbit eth2 = 1Mbit teql0
Hi there, I have two ethernet connections of 2Mbit/s each and I''m trying to add them together to one 4Mbit/s connection but I cannot get more than approximate 1Mbit/s! My setup: I have a LAN (10.2.18.0/24), connected to a larger network (10.0.0.0/8) by two WAN-connections with 2Mbit/s each. On each end I have a Linux router. I first setup the routers to use TEQL with one of the
2005 Jun 22
2
Question: TEQL via gateway
Yesterday I posted a question, but I guess too much detail is provided that no one would bother to read, so I rephrase the question and hopefully some one may be willing to read. Sorry to spam. I am using TEQL on two computers, each with two network interfaces. The two eth0 are connected directly, and the two eth1 are connected via a gateway (a linux machine). The problem is that when I send
2005 Jun 23
6
urgent TEQL problem
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
2005 Jun 21
2
TEQL and Subnet problem
TEQL and Subnet problem I have a network topology shown below, and I am trying to use TEQL. My problem is: When I ping to P3.teql0 from P2 ("[P2]# ping 16.119.144.66"), the traffic can never go from P2.eth1, and all traffic only goes to P1.eth0. What P2.eth1 (16.119.144.33) did is broadcasting an ARP asking for the MAC address of 16.119.144.66, although I have specified the route to
2006 Jun 01
13
Not understanding network setup!!
Hi to all, +-------+ eth1 +-------+ | |==========| | ''network 1'' ----| A | | B |---- ''network 2'' | |==========| | +-------+ eth2 +-------+ A and B are routers # tc qdisc add dev eth1 root teql0 # tc qdisc add dev eth2 root teql0 # ip link set
2004 Mar 24
3
IP Masquerade issues
Okay here is my setup: Gentoo Box running 2.6.4 w/ 4 NICs 1 NIC is for internal network 3 NICs are for external network The machine has a static address assigned to the internal network nic. This nic runs dhcp and dns forwarding. The other 3 nics have external dynamic IP addresses. All will have the same gateway. There are 3 NICs because this is a very large pipe, that will only allocate a
2005 Jul 12
0
Teql and NetEm can''t work together
Thanks in advance! Summary: when I load netem and teql together, teql doesn''t work correctly. (If I load teql only, everything is fine) I loaded both netem and teql. Netem is associated with eth0, and teql is associated with both eth0 and eth1. But traffic only goes out of eth1. Attached are the commands that I used to configure teql and netem (on machine 1), and commands to
2002 Oct 31
4
Egress shaping over multiple interfaces?
Hello, After reading the excellent HOWTO I got traffic shaping working nicely over ethernet devices on a test setup. I can''t put this setup live though, because our main firewall has three 2mbit hdlc interfaces instead of a single device. We are using multipath routing using iproute2 nexthop at the moment, and that works fine for firewalling. But now I have a need for shaping and
2002 May 02
0
Using TEQL with two ADSL connection
Sorry this is the right message. Hi all, in my school I have: - two Netopia router for ADSL (perform NAT), - one linux box with 3 ethernet card I want to make a load balancing on the two ADSL line. I have configured the system as follow: The LAN interface, of the two ADSL router, have address (A) 192.168.0.254 (B) 192.168.2.254 The 3 ethernet card, on the linux box, have address: -eth2
2005 Jun 21
0
TEQL and Subnet problem (reformatted)
TEQL and Subnet problem I have a network topology shown below, and I am trying to use TEQL. P1, P2 and P3 are three linux machines, and each has two network cards. P2 and P3 are connected in two ways: (1) directed connection between P2.eth0 and P3.eth0; (2) connection via P1. P1 acts as the gateway. TEQL is installed on P2 and P3 to load-balance packet transmission by round-robin sending packets
2007 Jul 19
0
tc qdisc TEQL limited to two interfaces? [ 1.8Gbps ]
I''am using the following script to aggregate the bandwidth of one quad gigabit ethernet controller (pci-express). #!/bin/bash sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_reordering = 30 ifconfig eth1 up ifconfig eth2 up ifconfig eth3 up ifconfig eth4 up modprobe sch_teql tc qdisc add dev eth1 root teql0 tc qdisc add dev eth2 root teql0 tc qdisc del dev eth3 root teql0 tc qdisc del dev eth4 root teql0 ip link
2007 Aug 24
0
Wireless Ad Hoc and TEQL
I''m trying to follow Chapter 10 of the howto and apply it to two ubuntu machines each with two 802.11b/g interfaces. However, I cannot get a connection. I would like the 4 interfaces to create 2 ad hoc links on separate channels. I have set this up successfully with the following: /etc/dbus-1/event.d/25NetworkManager stop wlanconfig ath0 destroy wlanconfig ath0 create wlandev wifi0
2005 Aug 10
0
teql on virtual network interfaces ?
Hi all, I want to implement a "weighted" teql that can send packets to interfaces based on their "weights". To do this, I want to create multiple virtual network interfaces, and add them to teql. Since teql will send packets to each interface in a round-robin way, a weighted teql is achieved (my guess). I already have two physical network interfaces, eth0 and eth1. I
2003 May 07
0
teql and gre tunnel
Hi everybody, I want to do the following setup : | | Tun1 - Link 1 | Tun1 | | Router A | teql | INTERNET Link - | | teql |router B | | Tun2 - Link 2 | Tun2 | | This should permit to agregate Link 1 and Link 2 (less the cost of the encapsulation). The two tunnels are GRE ip tunnel. It seems to work fine
2003 May 23
1
ethernet bonding ?
HI All. I have a linux box connected to a switch network with 2 network interfaces, how would I able to ''trunk'' these 2 interfaces? options I can see are: - ethernet bonding - iproute2? - teql Which one are the best to use? I''m curretly having problem with ethernet bonding, my setup are as follow: ip add: 192.168.10.30/24 I do: # modprobe bonding # ip addr add
2007 Apr 18
0
[Bridge] Bridge + Teql!
Dear Gurus, Can you please help/guide me with the following: I have 3 NICs in my Linux RH 9 (kernel 2.4.20) machine. (eth0, eth1 and eth2). I want to setup a 'link equalizer' (teql) between eth0 and eth1. This I am able to do with the required commands (using the utilities 'tc' and 'ip'). Now I need to setup a bridge between eth2 and this new interface
2005 Dec 30
2
QoS script for gw without NAT?
I''ll take it from the begining... About one year ago I only had 1 IP and used wondershaper. It worked great. Now I got /27 (32 IPs) and a gw computer that talks to two ISPs via a two tunnels. See: http://www.flashdance.cx/pics/flashdance-LAN.png I _really_ have a need to do QoS on my connection, for example I host websites that uses all available upstream. When I download at the same
2001 Sep 01
0
Uneditted logfile for my ppp+tinc messup
Blame guus. -- Rob 'robster' Bradford Chief Editor/Lead developer DebianPlanet.org -------------- next part -------------- Sep 1 10:24:02 zeus syslogd 1.4.1#2: restart. Sep 1 10:24:17 zeus pppd[326]: rcvd [LCP EchoRep id=0x92 magic=0x9936a81f] Sep 1 10:24:47 zeus pppd[326]: sent [LCP EchoReq id=0x93 magic=0x48b43815] Sep 1 10:24:47 zeus pppd[326]: rcvd [LCP EchoRep id=0x93
2019 Nov 25
0
nouveau on NV04 calling illegal method 02fc under fbcon
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 9:08 AM Bruno Prémont <bonbons at sysophe.eu> wrote: > > Hi, > > Trying a new kernel on old [NV04] system I get tons of > nouveau 0000:01:00.0: gr: intr 00000001 [NOTIFY] nsource 00000040 > [ILLEGAL_MTHD] nstatus 00004000 [PROTECTION_FAULT] ch 0 > [DRM] subc 3 class 004a mthd 02fc data 00000003 > errors when operating on console. >
2005 Jul 26
1
multi-path TCP performance
I am measuring the performance of one TCP connection over two symmetric paths. Packets are sent to two paths alternatively. I found that when the latency of each path are within 1ms, the overall TCP throughput is the *sum* of the throughput of the two paths. However, when the latency of the two paths increases to 5ms, the overal TCP throughput drops to the throughput of a *single* path. Has anyone