Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Konstantinos Raissis" <kostas@first.gr>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] TEQL question: slave devices should be connected at the Data Link layer ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:14:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-98760694302389@msgid-missing> (raw)

Hello to all,

I have made some tests with TEQL.

In the first successfull test 2 hosts were connected via ethernet  (eth0)
and ISDN (ippp0). The 2 ethernet ports were connected on the same LAN.

In the second test I tried to make things more complicated. The ethernet
ports of the 2 hosts were not connected on the same LAN but between them
there were 2 routers and the Internet. This did not work. I removed the
ippp0 from teql0 but still it did not work.

<pre>

      HOST1
      teql0
  eth0       ippp0
    |          |
 ROUTER1       |
    |          |
{Internet}     |
    |          |
 ROUTER2       |
    |          |
  eth0       ippp0
      teql0
      HOST2

</pre>

Here is the setup (with the eth0 only)

Host1
eth0:  X.X.X.131/28
teql0: X.X.X.133/28
on Router1
route add -host X.X.X.133 gw X.X.X.131

Host2
eth0:  Y.Y.Y.131/28
teql0: Y.Y.Y.133/28
on Router2
route add -host Y.Y.Y.133 gw Y.Y.Y.131

Host1
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root teql0
ip addr add X.X.X.133 dev teql0
ip link set dev teql0 up
ip route add Y.Y.Y.128/28 via X.X.X.133 dev teql0

Host2
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root teql0
ip addr add Y.Y.Y.133 dev teql0
ip link set dev teql0 up
ip route add X.X.X.128/28 via Y.Y.Y.133 dev teql0


When I try to ping the teql0 device of the other host (PING X.X.X.131 ->
Y.Y.Y.133) I notice attempts for ARP resolution of the destination address
(Y.Y.Y.133) although it belongs to a different network. My host replies with
Destination Host Unreachable.

So my question is: Do the slave interfaces of the 2 TEQL devices that
connect to each other have to reside on the same data link layer ?

If the above scenario (TEQL on eth0/ipppX where eth0 are connected via
Internet) does not work what do you suggest for having extra ISDN bandwidth
when 2 hosts are connected but not directly.

Thanks in advance
Konstantinos Raissis



_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/

                 reply	other threads:[~2001-04-18 15:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=marc-lartc-98760694302389@msgid-missing \
    --to=kostas@first.gr \
    --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