Re: [LARTC] Load-banancing. two ip's from one isp - solution

[Szymon Mroofka <sawar@interia.pl>]

Dnia ¶roda, 29 marca 2006 20:18, William L. Thomson Jr. napisa³:
> On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 19:12 +0200, sAwAr wrote:
> > hi for those who was fallowing this topic I can say that
> >
> > IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED must be disabled! After few tests I'm quite
> > sure that this was cousing my problems. Now I'm using 2.5.15 kernel
> > without patch of Julian Anastasov and load-balancing is working.
>
> FYI those patches do allot of things. Like static routes, unplug an
> interface or shut it down and watch all your routes and tables go away.
> Much less all the stuff the alt routes patch addresses.

I'll patch when I'll upgrading kernel or if there will be such need maby very 
soon. For now I'm tired of compiling and instaling new kernel it takes too 
long on my old and slow box ;).

>
> As for no nat? Interesting.
>
lucy ~ # iptables -L -nv -t nat
Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 47557 packets, 5508K bytes)
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               
destination

Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 1484 packets, 116K bytes)
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               
destination

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 1404 packets, 99243 bytes)
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               
destination

Yes... no nat needed.

> > lartc split-access how to and http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/nano.txt now both
> > are working fine
>
> Yeah over all you are cool if the rules are correct, but if you have a
> line go down or etc. You will want the prohibit line so a icmp message
> is sent.

My box is only used as a desktop so I don't need to care about any errors, 
this will not couse any problem like in big networks or companys where people 
need to have access to the internet all the time.

I thing I've done it by in my script:
         ip route append prohibit default table wew metric 1 proto static
         ip route append prohibit default table zew metric 1 proto static

in my "new" routing tables.
>
> > Now I will try to use fwmark based routing and propably I will write
> > with next problem soon :P
>
> Cool, that's one I have not done myself. Not found a need so far, been
> able to do all I have need via other means.

I'm using iptables to mark packets for htb so it should be easy to add few new 
rules and use it in routing... I hope it will be.... but I'm afraid that 
becouse of I can't use PRERUTING chain (only local packets OUTPUT chain) 
there may be some problems with it.... I'll check it soon. 


Pozdrawiam

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seksualna edukacja... >>> http://link.interia.pl/f191b

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc