This didn't have any effect, however I have made the changes for resources sake. Thanks for the info! On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 10:37, RonSenykoff@xxxxxxxx wrote: > Maybe try changing your weights from 40, 30, 30 to 4, 3, and 3 > respectively in your code listed below. The way the 'balancing' works > is it creates a bunch of virtual interfaces, one for each number in > the weight, then picks between them. By defining 40, 30, 30 you're > creating 100 different interfaces... quite a bit to handle. Even if > this doesn't solve your problem it will save resources. > > ip route add default scope global nexthop via 23.215.3.17 dev eth0 > weight 40 nexthop via 23.215.4.1 dev eth2 weight 30 nexthop via > 23.215.16.1 dev eth1 weight 30 > > to > > ip route add default scope global nexthop via 23.215.3.17 dev eth0 > weight 4 nexthop via 23.215.4.1 dev eth2 weight 3 nexthop via > 23.215.16.1 dev eth1 weight 3 > > HTH > -Ron > _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
