similar to: dgd/iproute/iptables multihoming problem

Specifying a source for the multipath route solved the problem. > ip rule add priority 200 table multi should be ip rule add prio 200 from $INT_NET table multi > ip route add default table multi proto static \ > nexthop via $EXB_GW dev $EXB_IF weight 1 \ > nexthop via $EXA_GW dev $EXA_IF weight 1 g

Full_Name: José Otero Version: Version 1.5.0 (2002-04-29) OS: Redhat 7.3 Submission from: (NULL) (192.187.16.164) Hi: Installation of package faraway as root, from tarbal: R CMD INSTALL ./faraway.tar.gz ERROR: cannot extract package from './faraway.tar.gz' idem, from zipped package: R CMD INSTALL faraway.zip gzip: faraway.zip has more than one entry--rest ignored ERROR: cannot

I'm using the fixed argument in arima. Shouldn't ar4, ar5, and ar6 display as zero in the output? Call: arima(x = window(log(hhprice), start = c(1990, 1), end = c(2003, 3)), order = c(7, 1, 0), xreg = window(ts.union(exa1 = lag(exa, -1), exa12 = lag(exa, -12), exb1 = lag(exb, -1), exc1 = lag(exc, -1), exc12 = lag(exc, -12)), start = c(1990, 1), end = c(2003, 3)),

I have a doubt. If you use such a script monitoring the link status with ping and then reconfiguring, why do you need the DGD patch? You need to do some reconfiguration (change multipath to a single default route) anyway if you use the script, right? Also, the DGD patch uses src to lookup the routing table entry, but if you have a dynamic IP for the WAN interface (PPPoE, DHCP etc), this approach

Hi All, I have one query which may be quite silly. My Linux internet gateway has Dead Gateway Detetction patches applied to it''s kernel. If I am right, the DGD patches allow us to add static routes which are not destroyed even if the interface or the link goes down. I want to know whether, with the DGD patches applied, the traffic shaping rules defined using tc, added to an interface

Hi I have read various info, and mailing list archives, but have not found an answer to the following. I have a few servers with configurations similar to the following: They each have multiple uplinks to the Internet, and a sample config is as follows: eth1 is 192.168.0.1, connected to 192.168.0.2 eth2 is 192.168.1.1, connected to 192.168.1.2 My default route looks like: ip route add scope

Hi, I try to shape my incoming traffic. I have 2MBit/s DSL bandwith and the following ruleset (on the internal interface): $INT="eth1"; $INT_NET=192.168.1.0; $MAX_IN=2Mbps; dev $INT { egress { class (<$int>) if ip_src:24 == $INT_NET; class (<$ssh>) if tcp_sport == PORT_SSH; class (<$smtp>) if tcp_sport == PORT_SMTP; class (<$http>) if

Hello all! I applied http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/routes-2.6.8-10.diff patch to kernel 2.6.8.1 and it works fine, or almost fine. It does the load balancing well, but when one link is dropped it continues to try it. At the end of http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/nano.txt it is said to ping gateway 1 and gateway 2, for the kernel to know if that route is working, but since my linux is connected to the links

* Is there a way to configure NUT so that it recognizes the huge additional battery pack that has been attached to the 2200XL? The 51minutes runtime is a number consistent with the load we have placed on a stock standalone 2200XL. With the extra large battery pack we've added, the runtime should be more than 2.5 hours. * I see the "Bizzare configuration" graphic on the

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 All, are there any plans to allow FreeBSD jails to bind to more than one IP address? My scenario (virtual hosting) : 3 front-end hosts with 2 interfaces each, one on the public network, the other on a private subnet. 1 back-end host, providing NFS mounts for the front-ends. This scenarion is not uncommon in ISP environments, usually with a big

Hello all, I have a linux router with 2 interfaces(eth0 - ISP and eth1 - LAN). I''ve established a VPN connection(openvpn) over eth0 with a friend of mine => tun0 interface. I want half of my LAN to have Internet access through the eth0 interface and the other half through the tun0 interface. I''ve set up a script like the "load balancing split access" instructions

As suggested on the netfilter list, I''m posting here too: Current network layout: Internet | ----100.100.251.217---- / (router) \ Internet | | | 100.100.251.220 100.100.251.218

Signed-off-by: Scott Seago <sseago at redhat.com> --- AUTHORS | 17 ++++++ README | 10 +++ conf/ovirt-agent | 12 ++++ conf/ovirt-db-omatic | 12 ++++ conf/ovirt-host-browser | 12 ++++