similar to: Gre Tos

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I am tring to us ip route to load balance between two interfaces. ip route add equalize 10.200.1.0/24 nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta2 Where neta and neta2 are gre tunnels. Testing show that packets travel in a single sided manner. Do I need to use the multipath (IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED) module? thx jason

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

Hi, I have two systems each with 2 two gre tunnels over ipsec. The tunnels are setup to loadbalance using ''ip route''. Using ping from one server to the other I get equal results via the two gre tunnels, but when I try a large ftp transfer the utilization of one tunnel is 90% and the other 10%. The two interfaces are both 100/full. What would be the reason for this, or would

Hi , I am trying to set up a GRE tunnel between two linux routers. The routers have a 400 MHz Processor. Linux .2 65.0.0.2 Linux LAN1 -------- Router -------- INTERNET ---- Router ---- LAN2 10.10.10.0 .1 208.1.0.1 (Simulated) .1 .1 192.168.2.0/24 /24 Scripts to Create the tunnel ip tunnel add tun0 mode gre remote 65.0.0.1 local

Hi, Does anyone tried to get ipip or gre tunnel behind NAT environments. ? i''m trying to make both side tunneling with ipip or gre with private address just like belows.. A -------------------FIRWWAL -------------------INET ------------------- B PRIVATE PUBLIC PUBLIC (10.100.0.1) (211.xxx.xxx.xxx) (

hi i am running Debian/GNU Linux with 2.4.26 kernel and radius server my kernel conf looks like this <*> Packet socket [ ] Packet socket: mmapped IO < > Netlink device emulation [*] Network packet filtering (replaces ipchains) [*] Network packet filtering debugging [ ] Socket Filtering <*> Unix domain sockets [*] TCP/IP networking [*] IP: multicasting [*] IP: advanced

Hi, I got a problem similar to this one (http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2005q4/017614.html), GRE tunnel can forward normal IP packets such as ICMP but failed to tunnel multicast traffics. Here''s the setup: 192.168.20.0/24 LAN-A--------------RtrA-------------RtrB--------------LAN-B 192.168.50.0/24 192.168.60.0/24 RtrA

Hi! Can I create the unnumbered GRE tunnel with iproute2 utility? Can someone provide me a link/howto/example_config how to do it? The topology is one tunnel between two linux boxes: -- eth1-|__|-eth0 <-------------> eth0-|__|-eth1 -- I''m trying now with: ip tu add tun1 mode gre local loc.IP remote rem.IP ttl 255 dev eth0 ip addr add tun1 0.0.0.0 ip link set tun1 up but it

Hello, I connected the network 192.168.1.0 with 192.168.2.0 over the internet trough a GRE-Tunnel. I don''t know if I set up all things right: The client-pcs in both networks have a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0 and 192.168.2.x''s default gateway is the server wich has started the tunnel. The 192.168.1.x''s default gateway is 192.168.1.250 wich routes traffic destinated to

Hi! I read http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2002q4/006244.html and I did that. Can anyone tell me if there is something else to do for shapeing over tunnels to work? I noticed that gre interfaces don''t have a queue attached. I''m running linux-2.6.15 and iptables-1.3.4 with no patches. Thank you in advance, Sorin.

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi Devik/Patrik, In setting up IMQ/HTB with a GRE Tunnel I''m constantly getting kernel errors: [root@linux /root]# dmesg ... ... ... NET: XXX messages suppressed. Dead loop on virtual device gre1, fix it urgently! ... ... ... This I get only if I''m going to start cross device b/w control. If I remove iptables rule iptables -t mangle -D POSTROUTING -j IMQ then no such warning

First of all, I''d like to thank Andy Furniss for his direction and for helping me get a working example up and running. For the following set up to work, you will need a linux computer at the ISP (server), a linux computer at the client location (client), and some a public range of IP''s you plan to send down to your client. (as this configuration involves patching the linux

we have an external 2Mbit dsl connection and running on it are several gre vpn tunnels so far i''ve given priority to the vpn traffic (using htb) can i now put rules in for the tunnels to control traffic within each tunnel (that''s where our video conferencing etc runs)? or can i only control the real interface (eth1 in our setup)? if not can i somehow see the packets inside the

Looking for some advise from the experts out there. We do simple traffice shaping and I''m having trouble figuring out how to shape vpn traffic using a tc filter. The following filter works fine for SSH tc filter add dev eth2 parent 1:0 protocol ip u32 match ip sport 22 0xffff classid 1:10 The following throws and "Illegal match" error when trying to filter GRE traffic. tc

I have a requirement which I guess it is not too unusually, however I haven''t quite figured out how to do it and couldn''t find any examples which handle that. I have made myself a Linux-based bridge, eth0 bridged with eth1 to form br0. In this bridge, I run ''tc'' script to handle QoS. So far nothing unusual. However, what''s different is that this

We''re trying to figure out how to have equal cost multipath routing using OSPF (quagga) and have come up with the following... Has anyone done something similar? -- How do you deal with incoming services (mail/web/etc) in such a scenario as below - And does anyone have any suggestions? There''s more detail below.... Diagram and overview: Network A connects to Core1 and Core2

Hi all, I want to setup link sharing with a filter that places traffic into different queues based on values within the TOS byte. Strangely I can''t get this to work. I use the following command for the filter: tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip tos 0x10 0xff flowid 1:10 I then mark the packets on the user machine using the ''mangle''