On 01/13/07 05:54, zutph3n@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Both links have their own ip but have the same gateway. The problem is I can't seem to get egress traffic load balanced over the 2 nics.
I don't know if it is still a problem or not, but I ran in to something very similar a LONG time ago (mid 2.4).
Basically what I found was the problem was that (I believe) multi-path routing really is multi gateway routing. I.e. load balancing across two (or more) different gateways. In your case, and the case that I had, all the IPs in the world did not make any difference b/c each path had the same default gateway.
My solution at the time was to use UML routers to provide different subnets to the box doing ECMP routing. Each UML basically NATed from the one upstream network to a small downstream private subnet that was unique for each link. This allowed the box doing ECMP to see different gateways. This worked great until I hit a memory limit on connection state.
I should probably say that the problem I ran in to was not a problem with ECMP but the number of hosts that I was trying to NAT with the amount of RAM that was on the box. I was able to resolve this by adding RAM to the box to provide a larger Connection State Table. For the record, the box was running a mid 2.4 kernel with a subnet that was the size of 4 class C networks (2048 IPs) on a box that had 256 MB of RAM. I ended up taking the box up to 2 GB of RAM and things have been working GREAT ever sense. I do believe this memory / connection state problem has been resolved long ago. However the system is working and payed for and the client is perfectly happy with what is in place and sees no reason to do any thing with it. (If any one would like more details, just ask.)
Grant. . . . _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
