similar to: ip rule to remove

hi I have trying to remove the extra rules from my routing tables, however with no luck Also I want to know these duplicate entries have an effect on packets going routed? I have this overwhelming rules lists from my predessor who added the "ip rule add fwmark" entries in firewall script, and on each run of firewall script its creates an extra entry in routing table. Now what I want to

I''m having trouble routing on high fwmarks, I want to use a lot of different marks for 2 routes so that I can QoS based on the marks ip rule looks like this: 0: from all lookup local 32751: from all fwmark 31 lookup dslout 32752: from all fwmark 30 lookup dslout 32753: from all fwmark 29 lookup dslout 32754: from all fwmark 28 lookup dslout 32755: from

Assuming if I have rules matching the same packet, the one chosen is the lower preference value or the high ? For example # ip rule list .... 100 from 192.168.1.0/24 lookup main 200 from all fwmark 5 lookup first ..... Packet is matching both rules, the one with priority/preference 100 or 200 is selected ? _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list /

Hello, everyone! I would like to solve the following problem. Btw, I''m terribly sorry about the pseudo-asciiart, but that''s all I can paint as a tropology. I''m hoping it''ll be enough. ----Internet---- | | | eth0 machine A routing+ipchains eth1 | ------------------ machine B So, given I''m running kernel 2.4.19 and using ipchains

Hi all! I try to make port based routing, because a have two connections to the internet. My router is a "one disk floppy router for linux". It is a big router project www.fli4l.de. I try also to make a opt, it is like a plugin for this router. This project uses Kernel 2.2.19 compiled with libc5 (because it is small and you can use one floppy disk). At the moment, iproute2 is not

Hi... I have installed ip route 2 package on Linux kernel 2.4.25 I am using 2 tables: ################################### ebox:100.254~# ip route list table ALTER default via 192.168.100.253 dev br0 ebox:100.254~# ip route list table main 10.0.0.254 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.0.1 192.168.100.0/24 dev br0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.100.254 192.168.100.0/24 dev

Hello all, I am going through the LARTC howto to understand how the iproute2 works. But some concepts like Policy Routing, RPDB etc are not clear to me. I am pretty new to iproute, beeing using route command for long... From what I understand 1. rules (ip rule) tell how to select packets for routing and route (ip route) tell where to route the selected packets. 2. A collection of rules is

Hi, I want to use the dsmark, but it always says: "unkown qdisc", although I have enabled it (y in Network options), and I have my kernel recompiled. I am using SuSE 8.1, 2.4.20 Kernel, tc available at the HTB site (with already precompiled HTB queue). Can anybody find the problem? thx _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail

Hello, I have a Debian-Woody-3.0 Router with 3 NIC''s. Kernelversion 2.4.18 +------------+ +-------------+ | | | | |192.168.1.1 | | 192.168.2.1 | | DSL-Router | | ISDN-Router | +------------+ +-------------+ | |

Hi. I understand that device aliases (e.g. eth2:3) are not shapeable. Does anybody know if this functionality is planned in the future? Anyway, for the time being the only option that seems to leave is to fwmark packets differently for each device alias and then shape based on that. Is it possible to set multiple marks on the packets? Alternatively, is it possible to check for a specific

I found following paragraph in the man page of iproute2. equalize allow packet by packet randomization on multipath routes. Without this modifier, the route will be frozen to one selected nexthop, so that load splitting will only occur on per-flow base. equalize only works if the kernel is patched. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Now, where

Can I add routes to rt_tables by hand with the vi editor? If I add a route to that file, it will be there if I reboot the box? I am sure there are stupid questions but I can''t find the answer into the papers I have here. Luis Miguel Cruz Miranda. CCNA - Systems Administrator _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

Hello list members, I notice here that the --server option is listed as undocumented. http://rsync.samba.org/rsync/fom-serve/cache/88.html My question is that the --server option is not documented, and I'd like not to build functionality into one of my systems without trusting that it will be there in the future. I was able to find the --server option simply by watching the rsync entries

Hello all, I need a virtual firewall/router solution. I''m thinking of a netscreen 1000 but I want to know if it can be done in Linux. Here is my idea: 1 Linux box 2 GigE interfaces 1 interface setup with a public IP address ($PUBIP) 1 interface setup with 802.1q VLAN trunking with 100 vlans assigned ($VLAN1-$VLAN100) a /25 subnet routed to $PUBIP from my core routers All $VLAN

Background: Thanks to the LARTC howto, this list and Stef Coene''s and devik''s excellent web sites I now have an ethernet bridge (patch bridge-nf.0.0.7) happily prioritising traffic (12Mbit) into 10 queues (9 for IP and 1 for non-IP) using a combination of iptables (fwmark) and htb3 and sfq. Many thanks. At the moment I''m filtering all non-IP traffic by setting the

Just a quick question... Is there a way to do content based routing (i.e. routing based on a TCP or UDP port) without using iptables, i.e. using the ip command? Thanks Andrew _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Hi all, i am using iptables (1.2.8) + iproute on Slackware 8.0 (i386) working fine, marking packet based in destination port and network and selecting the appropriate route with this marks (i have two links, a 256Kb frame relay and a 512Kb ADSL). Now i change the machine for a Sun Enterprise 250 (Sparc64 with Debian 3.0r1) and iptables works fine (the packets are marked) but iproute

I am running a public core router using private links from my provider. Details: RH7.3 9 interfaces (all Intel) eth0 is default gateway and has a private IP address all other interfaces are links to other routers or networks eth3 has a public IP address The core router will rarely need to access sites out on the internet, but when it does it cannot get there because the eth0 has a private IP

I have an htb qdisc setup and it is shaping my traffic wonderfully but I''ve just recently started taking a look at the output from the command tc -s class ls dev eth? Looking at the "rate" line I thought to myself..."cool I can use this to graph throughput avg.es without having to worry about the "Sent bytes" rolling over or being lost when the htb qdisc is

Hi all, I have a strange setup I am trying to get working. Initally I thought I could set it up by just setting up the correct routes. However after thinking about it I have convinced myself (maybe incorrectly) that I most likely need some sort of advanced NAT/routing setup. Below is a description of the networks involved: Local net (192.168.101.0/24) | | Linux machine eth1