similar to: Public Router using Private Links

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

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

Hello,I have single linux router ( fedora core 1 ), 2 ISP, 1 internal network,1 IP space from every ISP My scenario: eth0 1.0.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.252 -> ISP 1 eth1 2.0.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.252 -> ISP 2 eth2 1.0.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 -> IP space from ISP1 eth3 2.0.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 -> IP space from ISP2 Config I try: /etc/iproute2/rt_tables: 10 isp1 20 isp2 ip

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

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

Can I add routes to rt_tables by hand with the vi editor? If I add a route to that file, it will be there if I reboot the box? I am sure there are stupid questions but I can''t find the answer into the papers I have here. Luis Miguel Cruz Miranda. CCNA - Systems Administrator _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

hi thanks for your reply heh "Example: ip del rule pref 32742" is syntically wrong :) and when i tried "ip rule del 32742" it gives me error # ip rule del 32742 Error: argument "32742" is wrong: Failed to parse rule type so how to get get of these extra rules? 0: from all lookup local 32742: from all fwmark 0x2 lookup squid.out 32743: from all fwmark 0x2

Hi all, I have a debian server with 4 network cards: The first card is used to connect to public network and this network connects with a big router. The Second, third and fourth cards are used by other networks. The first card used a dinamic route with the big router. The other cards used a static route with a little router. All runs good but my problem is when I try to use the IP of my first

Hello list members, I notice here that the --server option is listed as undocumented. http://rsync.samba.org/rsync/fom-serve/cache/88.html My question is that the --server option is not documented, and I'd like not to build functionality into one of my systems without trusting that it will be there in the future. I was able to find the --server option simply by watching the rsync entries

Hi all, I have setup two multipath route tables on my system for doing failover routing, What I want it''s that if GW at route1 of the MP is dead, traffic goes by route2, for doing that I have created the multipath routes as follows: ip route add table mail.traffic proto static nexthop via ${GW1} dev eth1 weight 1 nexthop via ${GW2} dev eth1 weight 250 But it does not run as I

I have an htb qdisc setup and it is shaping my traffic wonderfully but I''ve just recently started taking a look at the output from the command tc -s class ls dev eth? Looking at the "rate" line I thought to myself..."cool I can use this to graph throughput avg.es without having to worry about the "Sent bytes" rolling over or being lost when the htb qdisc is

ive got problems with my network (120 people) ive got big pings (300ms)m whereas there are normally about 19ms. i do not know if my qos is proper (fast i mean). www.tdi.pozman.pl/fir2 - my qos www.tdi.pozman.pl/rules - my firewall can sb tell me if do it ok ? -- *Dariusz ''tdi'' Dwornikowski | Gentoo | admin at pozman.pl |

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 /

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

I''m having trouble routing on high fwmarks, I want to use a lot of different marks for 2 routes so that I can QoS based on the marks ip rule looks like this: 0: from all lookup local 32751: from all fwmark 31 lookup dslout 32752: from all fwmark 30 lookup dslout 32753: from all fwmark 29 lookup dslout 32754: from all fwmark 28 lookup dslout 32755: from

I have a computer with two interfaces, say with addresses 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2. I want to set up routing such that when I ping 192.168.1.1 it goes out through 192.168.1.2 and not to the local interface. Is this possible - all my attempts so far have been unsuccessful? If so, pointers, etc. would be gratefully appreciated. Jim -- Jim Redman (505) 662 5156 x85

hi I have trying to remove the extra rules from my routing tables, however with no luck Also I want to know these duplicate entries have an effect on packets going routed? I have this overwhelming rules lists from my predessor who added the "ip rule add fwmark" entries in firewall script, and on each run of firewall script its creates an extra entry in routing table. Now what I want to

Hi all, After a long reading of the LARTC, I were able to set up a working HTB config on my firewall. But my question is : Can I use a "ip less" box to do QoS ? With bridging software (or even without?) or thing like this and use an u32 filter to direct the traffic to the right class ? In other words, I can''t modify the existing network config or inster into (netmask is

Martin, If I understand whay you are suggesting, there is a problem in your design: It will only work if you use Hide NAT. The problem is that the ip_src == IP0 rule is wrong: The ip_src is not changed by the router and it is not equal to the IP of any of the machine interfaces. Can you think of a solution that will work in the following reasonabl scenario: Lets say I have two T1 internet

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 | +------------+ +-------------+ | |