similar to: Failover connection question

Greetings, I wanted to ask the list a question about dead gateway detection. I''ve followed the wonderful writeup by Christoph Simon on how to use Julians patch for dgd on two loadballanced connections, but I don''t want them loadballanced. How can I setup two default gateways but always have one be the preference unless it goes down. Once the dgd code sees that have it switch

hello all, previously i had some problems setting up a load balancing network, but now after re-applying the julian patch, it works good, but my doubt is that if we have statically provided and IP Rule for some network to use some particular gateway like follows, ip rule add prio 203 from 192.168.1.0/24 table 203 ip route add default via 203.88.135.213 dev eth1 src 203.88.135.212 proto static

here''s the setup (two dsl - same provider) +-----> link1 LAN----- linux box --| |----------internet +-----> link2 the setup is ok in terms of the failover requirement. the other link takes over when one is down. however, there is a very noticeable lag when both lines are up. i''ve tried changing

Hi! In our students'' hostel we have 6 DSL lines (dialups to different providers); we have set up a linux box (currently running 2.6.11-rc2-mm2, but the problem described hereafter also applies to previous 2.6-series kernels) with help from http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html#AEN298 Our Setup looks like this: 10.0.0.0/8 10.70.255.1 +----------+ +-----------+ |

Hi There, I am also trying to do the same for my network. I have two links from different ISPs and I want to configure a failover and load balancing Linux router. I am facing same problem here, that how to detect link failure and let Linux box switch the gateway. I know it works when the first gateway is physically down and not reachable. But what to do if my link is up but there is problem

hi all, i am setting up a load balancing netwrok with failover, i have applied julian patch, but whenever i try to traceroute from any client node, it gives me two entries for that destination, but i get different interface for that entries, so it doesn''t forward my requests, i have done masquerading for client nodes, the ip rule/route are as follows, ip rule add prio 222 table

Hello lartc! I have strange problem setting load balancing over 4 interfaces. Something won''t accept more than 3 interfaces, While setting: ip route add default scope global \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc0 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc1 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc2 weight 1 It''s ok: ip r l default nexthop dev pvc0

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

Hello Everyone, Hope everyone is doing well. First off I would like to say that Lartc has been an invaluable source of information for me, I was looking for a solution and a bit of google''ing found this wonderful HOW-TO. So now down to the Question: I have three Internet connections, (Soon to be four if I can get this working) ETH0 - 2mb/2mb ETH1 - 7mb/1mb ETH2 - 7mb/1mb I wish

Hi Ppl I have 5 adsl lines that after reading quite a bit i managed to get load balanced now abvoiusly it doesnt load balance evenly and this works on what routes are still in the routing cache. my question is my outbound masquerading had to be modified to use snat in iptables instead of just plain masquerading my outbound masquerading now works but my inbound port forwarding doesnt work would

Hi all iam trying to deploy loadbalance and failover My setup description --Fedora Core 4 --Linux 2.6.12.3 #1 SMP Mon Jul 25 22:37:34 IST 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux --tc utility, iproute2-ss050314 --ip utility, iproute2-ss050314 --iptables v1.3.0 And i had deployed Following configuration #table main with priority 50, the highest one ip rule add prio 50 table main #table 201 ip rule add

Hi! I got some strange problem with routing loadbalancing. I cannot get the full speed from my ISPs until I get some big files from close ftp server. I have server with one connection to internal network and 3 to ISPs: __________ | eth1|---- ISP1 | | internal--|eth0 eth2|---- ISP2 net | | (~300 | eth3|---- ISP3 hosts

There has been numerous threads etc regarding this but all that has left me is more than a little confused :-(. I have setup and environment consisting of two OpenVPN tunnels and wish to load balance at the packet level between them. I am currently running on Linux edm 2.4.21-20.EL.c0custom #2 Tue Oct 12 08:52:23 BST 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux And have install Quagga at each end to provide

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

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

I''ve applied julian''s paches to a 2.6.14 gentoo kernel with the appropiate options enabled, and i''m using a modified version of the mpath2.sh script also available on julian''s site http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/ Overall everything works nearly perfectly. Incomming connections to either the fios (PPPoE) connection, or cable modem get routed back out correctly. The

Hello. I have the problem that I have two gateways on the same subnet, 80.237.244.1 and 80.237.244.33. Both gateways are 100 MBit cards, so I have 2 times 100 MBit to the Internet. The NIC in the server is a gigabit-card, so this card is easy able to use both gateways for outgoing traffic. Now I just want to use both gateways for my outgoing traffic but no matter what I do, it doesnt work. I

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, 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´m making an script for load balancing of two cablemodems internet connections toward my LAN. The problem is that when I try to ''equalize'' the the two internet connections with the weight=1 it doesn´t work. On the other hand, if I put 5 and 5 it works, but not at 100%, it does intermittlently, some times works and others don´t. example: ip route add default equalize\