similar to: multipath device round robin not working?

Dear List. I try to build multipath connection w/ load balance to internet with two different gateway; My system is RH-8.0 with iproute-2.4.7-7.90.1.rpm and Kernel-2.4.26 (patching with Julian A. patch),and follow guide from http://www.linuxvirtualserver.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

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

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 people: I''m new in the forum. I''ve implemented the script for load balancing of "Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HowTo" and I''ve a question: When I run the next command : "ip route" I get the folowing information: -------------- 192.168.0.32/27 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.33 192.168.0.96/27 dev eth2 proto

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

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

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

Goodday, First my network layout: dsl router (10.0.0.99) | server (eth0 10.0.0.1, eth1 10.0.1.10) | 3 times windows machine (10.0.1.2, 10.0.1.3, 10.0.1.4) (all with proxy settings 10.0.1.10:8080) Now on the server is mandrake 10 installed with shorewall as firewall. And a apache webserver (and no ftp server). When i turned internet sharing on it started squid which added a line in the

Hello, I have finished setting up the load balancer with IPROUTE ... also patch the kernel to support DGD and now it''s working fine with the valuable guide at LARTC website, Julian Anastasov, and the kind people in this mailing list. Now I would like to launch a web server and a ftp server to the public but I''m stuck into a problem and really need your help. Currently internal

Hello everybody. I could not find an answer to my problem in the archive. (But that may just be me :-) ) I have a problem with proxy arp and connection from loc (localnet) and from the firewall. Works fine from internet to dmz / proxy arp and vise versa. I have a feeling the solution is simple, but I''m no guru in Linux routing etc. The problem seems to be the routing setup. loc -

Hello Tom and others on the list. Tom - you might recall that the other day (night) I had problems with my axip setup (protocol 93) and we made some changes to the policy, zones and interfaces files. You added ''peers and tunl+'' Following that change nothing seemed to work. In fact you wanted to see the shorewall status file, among other things. Well - tonight, I carefully put

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 list I have a strange problem here. Maybe it is normal behavior and i search within the wrong direction. Probably someone here can give me a hint. I have a device (rhel4 kernel 2.6.9) with 3 interfaces. 2 interfaces (eth0, eth2) are bridged together (br0) and the bridge device has an ip address assigned (192.168.11.15). Another interface (eth1) has assigned 10.7.0.10. So far so good.

I have a working LVS-Setup on CentOS 5.4 with the following settings in sysctl.conf: net.ipv4.conf.lo.arp_ignore = 1 net.ipv4.conf.lo.arp_announce = 2 net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_ignore = 1 net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_announce = 2 Now I''d like to use shorewall, but after activating it, shorewall changes both arp_ignore values to 0. I just found out how to set arp_ignore for separate interfaces, but

I was trying the following setup with IPIP tunnels, one that used to work through another ISP, but no longer... Internal network | Linux box 1 (kernel 2.2.24) iif=10.0.0.1, extf=a.b.c.d, tunf=172.16.0.1 | |local metropolitan network | Another Linux box 2 (kernel 2.2.17, or 2.4.19, same result) iif=irrelevant, extf=x.y.z.v,

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

Dear all, Has anyone experienced this whilst running DRBD over eth1 between two CentOS 5.7 servers? eth1 is a private IP address, unroutable. eth0 is the public address. CentOS will reply sometimes once every 3 days or every 14mins~ saying "My public IP is on eth1" to arp requests when it's not, it's eth0. This freezes traffic and causes issues. We've looked at arp*

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, this might seem like a classical problem but I''ve trouble getting this working correctly: # ifconfig ### output stripped down: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:FC:2B:EB:1B inet addr:192.168.5.220 Bcast:192.168.5.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:44:60:EC:58 inet

Shorewall 4.5.1.1 I have 5 interfaces on a centos box, the first two are internal on two different subnets, the next two are two different ISP''s and the last one is a private network for testing and administration. The second internal subnet (eth1) is rejecting all the arp requests to it and I get the following in the log files ever second or two - May 16 05:28:54 services kernel:

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