From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Rabbitson Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 12:06:54 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Load balancing using connmark Message-Id: <46430ADE.6090804@rabbit.us> List-Id: References: <1178722806.7492.55.camel@vulcan.aspl> In-Reply-To: <1178722806.7492.55.camel@vulcan.aspl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org Salim S I wrote: > Let me explain why the marking is done in POSTROUTING. > > want, letting the kernel decide based on the weights. (some people do > think that we shouldn't let multipath decide routing, but thatz a > different story). I apologize, as I am one of these people, and subsequently assumed the OP wanted this. In this light I agree with Salim. On an unrelated note the OP should be aware that letting multipath do the balancing is impractical (i.e. does not work) in real life scenarios, but this indeed is a topic for a separate thread. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc