Dear Eliot, Many thx for all the efforts you're making to help me out..I've been battling with this for over two weeks now :( I had a few questions to ask you: 1) Does bonding support per-packet loadbalancing like teql does? 2) Is it compulsory to assign eth1 & eth2 ip addresses in teql setups like in the howto or can simply use them w/o ip addrs as in the bonding setup example you gave? 3) In the setup you propose with the transparent firewall, I don't think it'll work because since different networks are involved, only a router can forward packets between different networks. The bridge can only perform packet switching on one network. It can actually extend a particular network but it cannot join two different networks. That, I believe, is the work of a router. Please correct if you feel I'm wrong. 4) Do you believe it is possible to implement teql for the topology I'm working on, i.e using firewalls with ip addrs? I tried it many times but no success. The main problem was that I didn't know to what network to have the teql0 device on PC_B & PC_C point to? In the example in the LARTC HOWTO, the teql0 on Router A pointed to the teql0 device on the Router B. However, in the topology I'm trying to set up, I didn't know to which device to point to because of the intermediate networks that we have (for FW1 & FW2). Do you think I should use a multipath route on PC_B & PC_C, some thing like this: ip route add default scope global nexthop via 192.168.10.11 dev eth1 weight 1 nexthop via 192.168.40.11 dev eth2 weight 1 I tried it but no success. The teql0 device won't balanve traffic between the devices..don't know if I made a mistake in the formulation of the command!! Can you suggest me anything..I have enough PCs to test things that you might suggest me. Warm regards, Visham _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
