similar to: Newbie question - RPDB, policy routing etc...

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "Newbie question - RPDB, policy routing etc..."

2002 Oct 29
1
the routing cache and route selection; is this correct?
Hello all, I do not read C very well (especially kernel C). Though I have tried to muddle my way through an understanding of what''s going on in fib_hash.c, fib_rules.c, and route.c, I have not succeeded to my satisfaction, hence my post. I''m trying to document the general process of route selection, and have come up with the following overview. Could somebody point out any
2004 Aug 02
5
Route policy preference value
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 /
2003 Jan 16
1
Distribution linux with iproute included
Is there any linux distribution, with redundant internet connection management by ip included ? Thnx -- VETSEL Patrice Forum d''aide DEBIAN Francophone sur : http://kagou.tuxfamily.org/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
2002 Oct 09
7
ipchains iproute2 and port based routing
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
2002 Sep 10
3
RE: 4 nic advanced routing question update
ok i will do it in text: 66.92.114.46 eth0 209.141.2.194 eth1 192.168.119.101 eth2 192.168.120.101 eth3 What i have is a linux box RH7.3 which will eventually run Shorewall Firewall. On this box there is eth0 66.92.114.46 conneted to isp1 and eth1 209.141.2.194 connected to isp2 It also has eth2 192.168.119.101 and eth3 192.168.120.101 which will connect to a failover appliance which has 2 wan
2004 Aug 17
2
Two Adsl connections following lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html instructions....
I have two adsl lines on my linux firewall box and i want to do some load balance between them...i tried a lot of different things, but it isn´t working...Following the instructions of http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html i used the configuration above. using "iptraf" I can see some few packets using the ppp1 connection, but almost all the packets use ppp0 connection.
2003 Mar 06
14
policy routing at its best
hello list (and martin) ;x i have now composed my final(?) policy routing design. the goals i had when beginning with this, for you that have not follow mine and martins thread, was to 1) only let 192.168.1/24 to see all routes, 2) not route between defined networks, except to and from 192.168.1/24 and 3) not defined networks should only be able to reach 192.168.1/24. this might sound simple.
2002 Sep 04
0
RPDB && routing locally generated (and marked) traffic
Hello all, I''m using iproute2 + ipchains and have a question about locally generated packets. I have noticed that I have no problem marking packets in the input chain from sources other than my router. These packets are marked and routed exactly as I expect. Now supposing I want to mark particular outbound packets which are locally generated. The only solution I have found so far
2003 Sep 19
1
ip rule add (Changing order of rules?)
I need to route: from 196.33.50.0/25 (default route) to ISP1 from 196.33.248.0/24 (default route) to ISP2 ISP1 --------- fire --+---- 196.33.248.0/24 / | ISP2 --------/ +---- router ----- router ----- 196.33.50.0/25 What I''ve done: Default route via ISP1 created routing table ISP2 for default route via ISP2 I would like to do the following but they get
2003 Apr 15
3
SNAT or DNAT or what?
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 | +------------+ +-------------+ | |
2003 Jun 04
1
negate ip addresses
Hi, is it possible to make rules or routes with negated ip addresses like that: ip rule add from ! 192.168.0.0/16 table xyz ? Or is this planned for the future? Thanks Regards Lars Täuber _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
2004 Jan 13
1
simple(?!?) source routing
Hi, I''ve set up a Linux box with redhat on to act as an internet gateway and I''m running into a few problems. Its got two adsl modems connected to it, both connected to seperate 512kbs lines. Now I''ve followed the simple source routing in the advanced routing howto to the letter but it doesnt work. I''ve got it autoconnecting on startup and redhat puts ppp1
2002 Nov 27
5
transparent PAT
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
2005 Jun 20
1
Interface bound routing
Hi, I''m sorry for "novice"-level question, but I hope your expert advice will save me many painful hours running after my own tail... Let assume I have Linux box with eth0, eth1 and eth2 interfaces. Each one has IP assigned from different network. By default, IP address associated with eth0 is chosen as default routing. My application creates thee TCP sockets and explicitly
2004 May 07
0
Policy based routing support for IPv6 in Linux
Hi all, I have a dual stacked (IPv4/IPv6) Linux host (S) with two interfaces that can both be used to reach a destination (D) and are both up. In order to make sure a packet is transmitted over the correct interface I use policy based routing to choose the correct routing table based on the IP source address. The network setup is shown below: |---| | D | |---| | | |---|
2003 Feb 27
1
Routing for multiple uplinks/providers
Hi, I read the howto of iproute, I have the same case with HOWTO, the difference is that the whole incoming traffic goes through interface 0, the other difference is that I do not want to balance the out going traffic, because I have specific networks to take it throughout another interface. Mi Case IF1 --> Input and Output IF2 --> Only aoutput for three Network I need Help, How can I
2003 May 07
4
dsmark, unkown
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
2004 Jan 15
2
Fw: Re:simple(?!?) source routing
Hi, Thanks for the reply. Thats where the problem starts. If I set ppp0 as the default gw the internet doesnt work anymore. This is how im doing it... route del default route add default gw 217.32.81.74 dev ppp0 if I put it back to ppp1... route del default route add default gw 217.32.68.73 dev ppp1 It works fine again. Whats up with that? Cheers, Chris ----- Original Message
2003 Sep 05
8
where is "equalize" kernel patch?
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
2006 Feb 02
1
routing question: multipath routing for SIP
I have two T1s and I'd like to split my SIP traffic over the two. I am looking at this: http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html what bothers me about it is the note "Note that balancing will not be perfect, as it is route based, and routes are cached. This means that routes to often-used sites will always be over the same provider.". If all my traffic goes to the same