similar to: Multipath Connection problem on RH-8.0

I''m sure that I had found (and printed out ...) a really good tutorial that explain how to use Julian Anastasov''s routing patch, but I can''t seem to find it now. Any pointers? -- ****************************************************************** Glen W. Mabey Glen.Mabey@usu.edu http://mabeys.homelinux.com/glen/

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

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

--------------eth0---80.48.56.70---------- -------------80.48.56.65 ISP | my | router1 | | | linux | | | router2 ------------eth1---192.168.200.10----- ----------------192.168.1.1 ISP I''ve two ip from my isp one public and one internal. ISP have two routers router1 is gw for public ip and router2 is gw for internal

Dear Lists, I have problem regarding multipath connection to internet behind NAT. I use 2.4.26 kernel in RH-9.0 with Julian Anastasov patch, and version iproute2-ss020116 (Fedora RPM package). Dual homing and dead gateway detection work fine as we expected, the problem is , everytime we hit site that have redirect page address (URL no absolute), it''s doesn''t reply. (ex:

I have two internet lines and I want to do equal cost loadbalancing on the two uplinks to the internet. This is what I do: ip route add 200.200.200.0/24 dev eth2 table 200 ip route add default via 200.200.200.254 dev eth2 table 200 ip route add 100.100.100.0/24 dev eth1 table 100 ip route add default via 100.100.100.254 dev eth1 table 100 ip route add 200.200.200.0/24 src 200.200.200.1 dev eth2

i´ve been searching for a load balance solution since a month ago... what i can say is that it simply doesn´t work. I was unable to find one guy that did it with sucess. When "load balance" is the subject of the message on the list, the message is simply ignored. So... if it doesn´t work... why LARTC don´t delete it from the HOW TO and answer us with some "it simply doesn´t

I have question about multipath routing. I am running a 2.6.7 kernel (gentoo). I have a route with three nexthops on the same interface. I see a different nexthop being picked for different destination addresses. All is fine. Now if one of the nexthop goes down (arp entry times out and arp request doesnt get a response), does it remove the nexthop from contention and only use the remaining two

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

when doing somehitng like ip rule add fwmark 3 nat 200.42.75.183 table ppp0 prio 1 (the idea is that packets that match the fwmark 3 change their source address to 200.42.75.183)..it first apply the nat and then routes to table ppp0 right? in such case the, nat, why may be nat not being applyed? cause it doesnt work at all..it goes to that interface but does not nat the src address of the package.

Hi, I have a linux box loaded with RH7.1, 3 ethernet with load balance on 2 ISP. In theory, if one router stop to work (I have turn off for this try), the Dead Gateway Detection, would re-instradate alla traffic on other link. This not work...someone have more experience on this? Giorgio Biondi

I have 2 cable modems on a server (Linux 2.6.22). I use multipath, so the route is something like this: default nexthop via 201.6.102.1 dev eth1 weight 256 nexthop via 201.6.107.1 dev eth2 weight 128 The first one (eth1) has a higher priority, then when it goes down, I can "ifconfig" the interface eth1 down and Linux automatically detects the "dead"

Hi all, I have a similar question like many asked before I know but Please help as i cant figure out where the problem is and how should I tackle. I have 2 ISP connections. I want to share the bandwidth from both. I have copied the script from many places and created my own after changes. Problem is that only one connection is utilized at a time. Not both working. ratio of consuming

Hi, I have a linux box which balances load between two interfaces ( say WAN1 and WAN2). I have masquerading on for any request coming from LAN to the outside world. The setup is in such a way that WAN1 drops packets with source ip belonging to WAN2''s network and viceversa. For some strange reason, I find that packet coming out from the WAN interface has source address of WAN2 and

I''ve been trying - without success - to aggregate the bandwidth of 3 DSL modems using the instructions in the HowTo (sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2). I _believe_ I''m following the instructions to the letter, but when I add the last command (the "ip route" with "nexthop") then nothing goes out through the modems. Each modem works when I add a single default gateway

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, Please suppose following config: Two external interfaces for two different providers On each of them configured NAT for specific IP addr. ie. 4: eth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc htb qlen 100 inet 1.1.1.30/30 brd 1.1.1.31 scope global eth2 6: eth4: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc htb qlen 100 inet 2.2.2.66/27 brd 2.2.2.95 scope global eth4 On eth2

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

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

Greetings from a newbie! (Well, to this list anyway) I''m having a problem and I hope someone here might be able to help... I am strongly expecting an answer along the lines of "upgrade to v2.4.x", but I would REALLY preffer to avoid that for now... The setup: "Home brewed" v2.2.24 (will patch to v2.2.25 later today) with the DS8 patch applied. Currently