On Thu, December 15, 2005 14:21, wlagmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Im sorry, I forgot to inform you that the clients are not using this > 3 lines to go directly to the internet, instead the on the same > machine I install Squid proxy server, hoping that with the load > balance technique, squid can take advantage of the connection > simultaneously, so my problem actualy is the squid > to use the 3 lines simutaneously. I haven't used it myself so I'm a bit guessing here ; you may be able to alter locally generated packets (from Squid) using the ROUTE target combined with the nth match in the OUTPUT chain of the mangle table so the packets are diverted over the 3 NIC's. Something like : iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m nth --counter 7 \ --every 3 --packet 0 -j ROUTE --oif eth0 iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m nth --counter 7 \ --every 3 --packet 1 -j ROUTE --oif eth1 iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m nth --counter 7 \ --every 3 --packet 2 -j ROUTE --oif eth2 (Where eth3 is your LAN NIC.) Gr, Rob > Quoting Rob Sterenborg <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> On Thu, December 15, 2005 12:32, wlagmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> ... >> > Squid proxy, Im monitoring the 4 ports via MRTG and I noticed that >> > before It goes to link 2, link 1 must be saturated first or link1 >> > will stop and the request is only transfered to link 2. So it >> seems >> > that it is not doing a load balance, my idea of load balance is >> > utilizing the 3 lines simultaneously. >> ... >> >> Perhaps you can use the nth patch. >> http://www.netfilter.org/projects/patch-o-matic/pom-base.html#pom-base-nth >> >> >> Gr, >> Rob -- "Inspraak zonder inzicht resulteert in uitspraak zonder uitzicht."
