similar to: "Established connection" issues using multipath

Hi there, I''m trying to achieve the classic load balancing using the multipath. The gateways are: A (tunl0) and B (tunl1) This is the classical situation covered by the HOWTO: one computer with two Internet connections. The problems come when I try to use the same IPs for both A and B. So A is 10.229.25.8 and B 10.229.25.8. I cannot do otherwise, I''m forced to use the

I''ve tried with iproute and it works now ! commands for A: ip tunnel add mode ipip tunl1 local IP_A remote IP_B ip addr add dev net1 local virtual-IP_A remote virtual-IP_B ip link set net1 up Same on B. And then from A i''m able to ping virtual-IP_B. It seems one can not use tunl0 as a tunnel name, is it true ? I think it will be a good thing to add to the section 5.2 of the

The problem is described here: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-net&m=113550638110682&w=2 and continues here: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-net&m=113636640615375&w=2 Do you have any ideas to solve this problem? -- :wq! "I don''t know nothing" The One Who reached the Thinking Matter ''.'' [ Alpt --- Freaknet Medialab ] [ GPG Key

Hi, i was using rsync 2.4.5 for AIX 4.3 binary downloaded from http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/binaries/AIX/ . I now compiled the latest 2.5.6 on AIX 4.3.3 and created a tarball to use like the one available from http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/binaries/AIX/ . root@b50srv1:/usr/local/src# uname -a AIX b50srv1 3 4 000B14FD4C00 root@b50srv1:/usr/local/src# oslevel 4.3.3.0

Thank you Andy! I did''t find why I could''t use the fw match in ingress. Now it works. Now I ran into another problem: When I try to add a pfifo_fast leaf qdisc dor htb classes it seg.-faults. Is pfifo_fast a special qdisc? I can succesfully add other type of qdiscs. I found that a similar problem was reported in february on a MIPS architecture. root@zefir:/usr/src# tc qdisc

Hi to all, I have a problem with this wildcard and one E1 line. The server is a Asus P4P800S with the 865PE chipset, and 512MB RAM. The kernel version is 2.4.26. I have donwload and build the latest CVS version of zaptel, libpri and asterisk following the ufficial instructions of digium. I have set up my server in this way: zaptel.conf loadzone=it defaultzone=it

Hello Gurus, I am a small problem with routing and here are the details. Interfaces on my server: * ipsec0 - 172.19.58.94 * tunl0 - 172.19.58.94 * eth0 - 172.19.58.94 Now, the problem is that there is another host 172.19.58.200. All communication to 172.19.58.200 should be through tunl0, and all the data should be secured using IPSec (tunnel mode - because there are more machines on my

Hi all, ive been using the nano howto to load balance to adsl links for a good while now ive got our live server running kernel 2.6.11.6 and these links work fine. i set up another server same model of machine and used the same kernel config ( wanted to try some tos stuff out) 2.6.11.6 but this one doesnt balance properly. what ever i put in table 222 (which is looked at from all sources) it

Hello, I am attempting to set an IP-IP tunnel between two PC in a same LAN in order to evaluate the performances of the tunnel (kernel 2.4.26). I read the section of LARTC HowTo about it and it seems simple but i do not succeed in setting it. I don''t find the new_tunnel.o module (cf LARTC HowTo). I found Configure.help a bit confusing : CONFIG_NET_IPIP "Saying Y to this option

Hello I have /25 addressed on a box (virtual devices on eth0) and I want to tunnel some of these addresses to my home network. One address to my gateway (a.b.c.d, external IP) and one address to my internal network (192.168.0.0/24-style). I will use the tunnels for irc, smtp and surfing. What protocol and which technique is easiest and best to use? One more thing. I don''t want to set up

Hello All, The following is what I was trying to do: A packet [Dest: 10.10.10.2, Src: 10.10.10.30] has a route through "tunl0". The bigger problem is that "tunl0" is a tunnel between 10.10.10.2 and 10.10.10.20... Which means that after encapsulation takes place, the packet would look like [Dest: 10.10.10.2, Src: 10.10.10.20 [Dest: 10.10.10.2, Src: 10.10.10.30]]. Thing

Hello all, I have two test beds running the exact same version of asterisk 1.2.7.1, latest of zaptel, libpri, etc.. Test bed #1 (Solaris 9,sparc ultra 5): This one is closer to a "production" machine, in that it is connected to a sip provider thru an iax2 connection and have an incoming DID configured. I can send and receive calls. Test bed #2 (Slackware Linux 10.2, AMD XP chip):

Hi, I''m trying to do some horrible private address routing between networks. Is there a way to handle the following? I''m guessing policy routing *might* be the way, but anyway... Two networks, accessible via public addresses -- a /29 on each. Each network, however, has more machines than this, so one also has 192.168.0.0/24 and the other has 192.168.1.0/24. I have an IPIP

All, Alright, I've looked around the internet, the voip-info.org wiki, and browsed the contents of this mailing list. While I've found a couple of scenarios that are close to this one, I haven't found one that uses my particular card (T100P). Without further delay -- I have successfully configured internal SIP services between a Snom 200 and a Windows X-Lite client and have

Just a useful FAQ entry to add ;) -- :wq! "I don't know nothing" The One Who reached the Thinking Matter '.' [ Alpt --- Freaknet Medialab ] [ GPG Key ID 441CF0EE ] [ Key fingerprint = 8B02 26E8 831A 7BB9 81A9 5277 BFF8 037E 441C F0EE ]

Hi, I have a problem with GRE tunneling. I read Advanced-Routing HOWTO about this and I did all as is written in this documentation. Even the same example is here which I need for my project. I want create (by means of GRE tunneling or IP in IP tunneling) virtual private network VPN - in first phase without IPsec in other phase with IPsec. I have two local networks distant apart with two routers.

Hi, is there a newer public key available? root at dc:/usr/local/src# gpg --verify dovecot-2.2.29.1.tar.gz.sig dovecot-2.2.29.1.tar.gz gpg: Signature made Wed 12 Apr 2017 12:40:03 PM CEST using DSA key ID 40558AC9 gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found root at dc:/usr/local/src# gpg --search-keys 40558AC9 gpg: searching for "40558AC9" from hkp server keys.gnupg.net (1)

On 12 Apr 2017, at 22.25, Ralf Zimmermann <r.zimmermann at siegnetz.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > is there a newer public key available? > > root at dc:/usr/local/src# gpg --verify dovecot-2.2.29.1.tar.gz.sig dovecot-2.2.29.1.tar.gz > gpg: Signature made Wed 12 Apr 2017 12:40:03 PM CEST using DSA key ID 40558AC9 > gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found >

Hey there, Earlier today I went to rebuild a Xen0 kernel and my modules_image failed with an error based on the fact that my Xen0 image did not have the standard kernel-image-XXX/linux-image-XXX name format. The error output is at the bottom of this email. Previously it had worked fine, only recently the maintainer (Kel) of the module source added some restrictions to modules.control.in to look

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