Re: Re[2]: Loadbalancing how to ? ? ? ?

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

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

 



Hi

in this case merging of all links to one big pipe
what if the one of the link fails.. its automatically detect
and combine rest of the links or it keep tries to send the packets dead gateway


for  example

if i have 3 links.. one fails.. rest 2 become one (big pipe) link right ?

or any other configuration required ?? or you given script works ??

hare
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Kurjata" <rkurjata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "ro0ot" <ro0ot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Linux Advanced Routing" <lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 11:53 PM
Subject: Re[2]:  Loadbalancing how to ? ? ? ?


Witaj ro0ot,

W Twoim liście datowanym 3 lipca 2005 (18:25:32) można przeczytać:

r> Is it possible to combine the 2 or 4 ADSL line into 1 line (big pipe)?

As I already wrote: Yes, (more or less :) with some limitations. All
those "blind" loadbalancing solutions have one BIG drawback - they
work for setups with lots and lots of concurent connections [cause
single connection has to use single line], and one smaller but annoying -
they cannot guarantee that subsequent reqests to the same host will
use the same source IP - home banking affected most.


r> Regards,
r> ro0ot


r> Robert Kurjata wrote:

Witaj Cao,

W Twoim liście datowanym 2 lipca 2005 (17:40:05) można przeczytać:

CVK> I have 2 ADSL ad1 and ad2 , one PC for my firewall and some
CVK> deamon on it with 3 ethernet : eth0 connect to my LAN (

This question comes and goes on this list :)

Please read information at: http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/ , especially http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/nano.txt
and you can try my script http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/tmp/mpath2.sh to
load balance 2 (or more - I was using 4) connections with great
success. No daemon needed :)

There are also other solutions in list archive.

IMHO the routing code has precedence over iptables so it chooses the
outgoing interface over which the iptables will SNAT in input routing
process. And thats why you will not see the effect in this setup (thi
interface has already been chosen). It is possible (and
reasonable) to SNAT to multiple IPs residing on one interface.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please...:)







--
Pozdrowienia,
Robert

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc




_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

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