On 10/25/2007 1:06 PM, the sew wrote
+-----------+ +---------+
+--------+ | ...245.18 +-----+ ...77.1 | +-------+
| ...0.x +-----+ ...0.1 | | COLO +-----+ 101.x |
+--------+ | ...245.19 +-----+ ...78.1 | +-------+
+-----------+ +---------+
Currently I'm natting on 0.1 ( -o ppp+ -j MASQUERADE ) , This was
setup by default as I did not want 0.x to be routed. I've however
taken off the natting, and added a route for 0.20/32 dev ppp62
nexthop dev ppp32 ( the 2 vpn interfaces) at COLO and obviously same
nexthop routes at 0.1 for 101.x
Ok, good. The NATing at 0.1 was part of the problem.
testing from 0.20, I scp a tar file over to 101.20 , still goes via
one line at time, the route cache which I disabled, just reroute it
the whole time( about every 5 sec) via the diffrent uplink, but not
to our result we want
Hum. I would question the routes then.
I use sysstat to check the speeds and tcpdump verified I its from
0.20 -> 101.20 ssh
Ok.
I understand now very clearly the key part.
My problem must be the tunnel, im sure im messing up, the equal cost
multipath routing , am I using the right utitily? , still iproute2
right, or is iptables gonna play big part here as well?
To the best of my knowledge you will still be using the "ip" command
from iproute2. Will you please show us your routing table and / or the
ip route command you are using to set up your ecmp route?
Grant. . . .
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
