> jose nuno neto pisze: >> GoodMornings >> Thanks for your input >> Im looking for redundancy but a little extra: >> >> I have already bonding >> >> bond0 :- eth0 + eth1 >> bond1 :- eth2 + eth3 >> >> And I have a IP witch I can reach from the 2Lans >> Its a ILOM IP that I use for PowerFencing on a cluster setup >> Since I have the paths I thought I could use them to get extra >> reliability >> Thats why I went into this iproute thing... >> >> BestRegards >> Jose >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: linux-net-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> [mailto:linux-net-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of wk >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 4:56 AM >>>> To: linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Subject: Multipath route >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Some time ago we were faced with a problem with multiple network >>>> interfaces in the same subnetwork. >>>> We would like to use several NIC's with IP addresses from the same >>>> subnetwork with link redundancy functionality. >>>> >>> If link redundancy is what you are after, you might want to consider >>> Ethernet bonding as an alternative. Instead of several network >>> interfaces >>> each with its own IP address, you get a single virtual interface that >>> you >>> assign addresses to and the physical interfaces become slaves to that >>> virtual interface. The bonding code switches the active interface when >>> the >>> current active interface's link goes down. >>> >>> See linux/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt in your kernel source >>> tree. >>> >>> Note there were at one time issues with using IPv6 over bonded >>> interfaces. >>> I don't know if they have been addressed in newer kernel versions, but >>> for >>> IPv4 it seems to work fine. Brocade has used it on some of its SAN >>> products for a few years now. >>> > > Jose, > > Could you try to apply the patch I've sent yesterday and tell us if it > works for you? > > This patch can be applied against 2.6.33 kernel and probably earlier > kernel versions, although I tested it only on 2.6.33. Im running a RedHat 2.6.18-164.2.1.el5 and it supposed to be supported by the Redhat after, so think I cannot patch the kernel.... But from your previous post, it seems to do what I wanned, I cant have that behavior from non patched kernel? > > That what you need to do in your case is to configure your route as you > wrote: > > 172.26.240.4 > nexthop via 172.26.247.248 dev bond1 weight 1 > nexthop via 172.26.31.248 dev bond0 weight 1 > > and additionally: > > # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/nexthop_alg > > > regards, > WK > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
