[LARTC] Sch_teql or multilink def. gw?

[LARTC] Sch_teql or multilink def. gw?

[Steen Suder, privat]

I'm to build a "bundlerbox" spanning over two or more DSLlines as 
outlined in the <http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/nano.txt>.

The idea is to multiplex a LAN over e.g. four cheap DSLs, SNATing it in 
the action. The DSLs are from different ISPs, but all equal in speed 
(2048/512Kb/s).

Now, it has come to my attention that there exist a tc-module called 
sch_teql.

As I understand it sch_teql + SNAT on each device will functionally be 
the same as the

"ip rule add prio 222 table 222
ip route add default table 222 proto static \
		nexthop via GWE1 dev IFE1 \
		nexthop via GWE2 dev IFE2" -thing from nano.txt.

Which one is the better one in terms of overall performance, usability 
and stability seen from a users perspective?

I know that there has been several questions regarding "cheap 
line"-multiplexing, but I couldn't a definitive answer to my question.

Either that or I havn't really understood what sch_teql does and how it 
could be utilized.

Another, though related question:

The multilink def. gw-example above does gw-selection on a per-session 
basis, as I've understood it.
The keyword "equalize" as in
"ip route add default equalize nexthop via gateway.number.1.ip \
	dev eth0 nexthop via gateway.number.2.ip dev eth1"

chooses routes on per-packet basis.
Can they both be used for my "box"? Why/Why not?

-- 
Steen Suder

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