similar to: dead onlink

Hi, I have a linux server running kernel 2.6.19 that is connected with 2 seperate 100Mbit links to the same isp: +---+ +---------------+ | I | +---------------+ | | | S | | | | eth0 --+--------------+ P | | |

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

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

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

Greetings routing folks, I want to use the netmask 255.255.255.255 to insulate (not quite isolate) machines on a shared subnet from each other. This works just fine on win XP, but Linux iproute will not acccept the gateway address in one step -- neither on the command line nor via DHCP: Here''s the interface, set up with a netmask of /32: # ip addr ... 2: eth0:

Hi. I''ve got here the following configuration: (turn on fixed pitch font to be able to see the scheme in a more accurately way) Client machines <-----> ADSL Router 1 <-----> INTERNET (192.168.0.0/24) (192.168.0.229) NAT Client machines <-----> ADSL Router 1 <-----> INTERNET (192.168.1.0/24) (192.168.1.229) NAT [if doesn''t really

The LARTC howto correctly describes load balancing and split access for traffic from a machine with multiple ISP connections (http://www.lartc.org/lartc.html#LARTC.RPDB.MULTIPLE-LINKS) -- *provided* the traffic originates from the machine itself (i.e. traffic regularly handled by the INPUT and OUTPUT chains of iptables). When forwarding traffic from an attached local network, the following

I was trying the following setup with IPIP tunnels, one that used to work through another ISP, but no longer... Internal network | Linux box 1 (kernel 2.2.24) iif=10.0.0.1, extf=a.b.c.d, tunf=172.16.0.1 | |local metropolitan network | Another Linux box 2 (kernel 2.2.17, or 2.4.19, same result) iif=irrelevant, extf=x.y.z.v,

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 recently installed tinc on a linux 2.4 machine which has 192.168.0.0/24 private network connected to eth0 and registered ip on eth1. I also installed tinc on Windows 2000 machine on a remote location. for this moment I can establish connection, on Linux machine tincd says: Sep 26 21:10:50 hostname tinc.gscvpn[483]: Node home (y.y.y.y port 655) became reachable But i

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

I'm having some difficulties joining a Win2k workstation to a Samba domain. This particular workstation is my work laptop (DRUMMSW01) which normally operates as a member of a standard Win2k domain called BIZ. At windows startup/logon, BIZ is specified as the domain. At home, my Samba PDC's workgroup/domain is HOME.LAN When I try to browse shares on HOME.LAN with the Win2k laptop, I

I have looked through the archives, and I can''t find the answer(not that it isn''t there) I have two connections to the net. I want load balancing and redundancy. cable adsl (24.141.) (64.229) | | | | | | | | ------------ | linux | |redhat 7.0| I have no idea were to even start. I would like equal access to both connections.

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

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''m trying to monitor my multi ISP shorewall with swping, the script works fine, i can see in log when an ISP is down, the script restart shorewall and /etc/shorewall/isusable is called, however in the swping log after the shorewall restart i see again a route by ISP (even the ISP down), is it normal ? should i not see one route less? shorewall version 4.4.5.4-1. ****

Hey, I''ve been scouring the web these past few days trying to find a suitable technique to load balance my network. Unfortunately I think my setup is very uncommon, so I''m looking to you guys to see if you can help. I currently have 2 ADSL modems, provided by the same ISP and terminating on the same gateway (I think having the same gateway is what is causing the problems, since

Hi, I am currently using a 2.4 kernel with multipath routing patch v5 to send outgoing packets in a 1:1 ratio over two lines, however the lines do not actually have equal upstream bandwidth, one has 800kbit and the other 600kbit, so ideally I would like to send packets in a 4:3 ratio, is there anything in 2.6 or a patch for 2.4 that could be used to do that? I tried this ugly hack but it

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

Hello, We have 3 DSL connections connected to eth3 and another interface with a dedicated link in eth0 (main table) We want to balance selected traffic (using fwmark and iptables) through our 3 DSL connections in a secondary table named DSL (without using the dedicated link in eth0), but the next command is not accepted, and gives us the following error: # ip route add default