[LARTC] Multipath, 2.4.16 + Julian's patches.

From: Adrian Chung <adrian@enfusion-group.com>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] Multipath, 2.4.16 + Julian's patches.
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 06:17:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-100831072321841@msgid-missing> (raw)

Hey all, I'm testing out Julian's patches, (2.4.16-6/Dec 14th), and
noticing some good, and weird results.

I followed the Nano-HOWTO, and can't say that I understand all of it,
but I'm slowly trying to get a grasp. :)

Right now, my rules look like this:

[root@wolverine linux]# ip rule ls
0:      from all lookup local
50:     from all lookup 50
201:    from 216.187.106.224 lookup 201
202:    from 24.112.58.139 lookup 202
222:    from all lookup 222
32766:  from all lookup main
32767:  from all lookup default

[root@wolverine linux]# ip route show table 50
216.187.106.128/25 dev eth2  proto kernel  scope link  src 216.187.106.224
192.62.100.0/24 dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.62.100.1
24.112.58.0/23 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 24.112.58.139

[root@wolverine linux]# ip route show table 201
default via 216.187.106.252 dev eth2  proto static  src 216.187.106.224
prohibit default  proto static  metric 1

[root@wolverine linux]# ip route show table 202
default via 24.112.58.139 dev eth1  proto static  src 24.112.58.139
prohibit default  proto static  metric 1

[root@wolverine linux]# ip route show table 222
24.0.0.0/8  proto static
        nexthop via 24.112.58.1  dev eth1 weight 2
        nexthop via 216.187.106.252  dev eth2 weight 1
default  proto static
        nexthop via 216.187.106.252  dev eth2 weight 2
        nexthop via 24.112.58.1  dev eth1 weight 1

If I unplug the DSL modem that's connected to eth2, after about a
minute or two, all clients start to be routed through the cable modem
on eth1.

However, I then decided I wanted to try and add a multipath route to
24.0.0.0/8 that uses eth1 in preference to eth2.

I find though, that no matter what, even after flushing the route
cache, some requests for 24.x.x.x addresses are still sent via eth2
even though eth1 is up and alive.

Is this supported?

I'm not sure what other information might be helpful, let me know if
any.

--
Adrian Chung (adrian at enfusion-group dot com)
http://www.enfusion-group.com/~adrian
GPG Fingerprint: C620 C8EA 86BA 79CC 384C E7BE A10C 353B 919D 1A17
[rogue.enfusion-group.com] 1:13am up 133 days, 17:12, 2 users

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/lartc/