Re: Multihop route - TCP connection losses?

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Witaj Marcus,

W Twoim liście datowanym 9 lutego 2005 (08:56:39) można przeczytać:

Mamy many yeas ago...... I faced the same problem :)

The answer is in nano-howto.
http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/ (look for nano-txt)
and look at the my WORKING example script placed there by Julian
http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/tmp/mpath2.sh
That script was originally used with success with 4 uplinks
(shorthened for the simplicity).


> Hi!

> In our students' hostel we have 6 DSL lines (dialups to different
> providers); we have set up a linux box (currently running 2.6.11-rc2-mm2,
> but the problem described hereafter also applies to previous 2.6-series
> kernels) with help from
> http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html#AEN298

> Our Setup looks like this:

> 10.0.0.0/8      10.70.255.1
> +----------+   +-----------+
> | intranet |---| linux-box |
> +----------+   +-----------+   10.254.0.1
>                 |   |   |     +-----------+
>                 |   |   +-----| HW-router |---(DSL -> Provider)
>                 |   |         +-----------+
>                 |   |
>                 |   +--------- (see above) [10.254.0.2]
>                 +------------- (see above) [10.254.0.3]

> (Above schematics drawn with only 3 instead of 6 DSL links)

> Our problem is as follows: it seems that when the route cache expires also
> existing TCP connections are rerouted, causing the connection to get lost.
> (Just a theory - I don't know how to check that)

> While that is fully comprehensible with UDP traffic, I thought I read
> somewhere that this shouldn't apply to TCP traffic (connections - once
> established - will always be routed through the initial hop).

> Does anyone know how to avoid this problem (which makes downloading big
> files a pain as some download-manager has to be used that supports
> appending/byte ranges)? Am I doing something wrong here, did I forget
> something?

> Our Setup is as simple as setting a multihop default route on the linux
> box like this:

> ip route add default proto static \
>            nexthop via 10.254.0.2 dev eth0 \
>            nexthop via 10.254.0.3 dev eth0 \
>            nexthop via 10.254.0.1 dev eth0 \
>            nexthop via 10.254.0.4 dev eth0 \
>            nexthop via 10.254.0.5 dev eth0

> We don't do any NAT as this is done by the hardware DSL routers.

> Thank you for any help!

> Marcus

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to
> watch somebody else doing it wrong, without comment.
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/



-- 
Pozdrowienia,
 Robert Kurjata

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

[Index of Archives]     [LARTC Home Page]     [Netfilter]     [Netfilter Development]     [Network Development]     [Bugtraq]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Users]
  Powered by Linux