From: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian@interlinx.bc.ca>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] simple dual Internet connection setup not sending
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:19:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1101475163.8287.94.camel@pc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1101398346.8287.66.camel@pc>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2037 bytes --]
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 21:40 -0800, gypsy wrote:
>
> Guessing from the lack of any mention of KeepState
KeepState? If you are referring to:
52459 2774K ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED
rules, I have those sprinkled throughout my ruleset where necessary.
The iptables "snippet" I included in my previous message was just that.
Just the relevant portion that does the NATting.
> in your iptables
> setup,
Like I said, the RELATED,ESTABLISHED state rules are in there. My full
set of iptables rules is >400. I did not see see a need to post that
fully here.
> my guess is that you ignored the advice to vist Julian
> Anastasov's web site.
No I didn't ignore it. But what that site is promoting is some kind of
floppy disk based router distribution or something.
>
> Start with this:
> http://www.geocities.com/mctiew/ffw/dual.htm
I am not looking to replace/rebuild my whole firewall. I simply want to
add a second link to my existing one and have the packets use the
correct interface -- to travel back out the interface from which they
came.
I don't want to do load balancing or failover or anything fancy. I want
two interfaces where I use one for all outgoing traffic and the only
time the alternate is used is to send response packets to connections
that come _in_ that interface or for routes that are specifically
directed through that interface via a routing table entry.
> You should also google LARTC "Finally: A working case of two adsl load
> balance". Read Ron Senykoff's post "load balance a file download across
> two connections - success!".
Interesting. Followed a few links too. Looks like a lot of bells and
whistles I am not really looking for (load balancing and failover, etc.)
but there is some hint of indication that there is a patch needed to
make sure NAT uses the right physical interface. Maybe I will go bug
the netfilter guys to see if this is the case.
Thanx,
b.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-26 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-25 15:59 [LARTC] simple dual Internet connection setup not sending return packets Brian J. Murrell
2004-11-26 5:40 ` [LARTC] simple dual Internet connection setup not sending return gypsy
2004-11-26 13:19 ` Brian J. Murrell [this message]
2004-11-26 14:39 ` [LARTC] simple dual Internet connection setup not sending Brian J. Murrell
2004-11-26 15:21 ` Brian J. Murrell
2004-11-26 16:44 ` Brian J. Murrell
2004-11-26 17:45 ` Brian J. Murrell
2004-11-26 21:27 ` [LARTC] simple dual Internet connection setup not sendingreturn gypsy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1101475163.8287.94.camel@pc \
--to=brian@interlinx.bc.ca \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox