* equalize traffic when link is down @ 2003-03-08 7:06 Daniel Wittenberg 2003-03-08 7:53 ` hare ram 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Daniel Wittenberg @ 2003-03-08 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Netfilter If you use equalize with 2 default gateways (like 2 ISP's), and one of them goes down, what happens to the traffic? Will it automatically go out the one up link, or will some traffic fail to go out? Dan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: equalize traffic when link is down 2003-03-08 7:06 equalize traffic when link is down Daniel Wittenberg @ 2003-03-08 7:53 ` hare ram 2003-03-08 7:40 ` [SPAM-RATING-1] " Daniel Wittenberg 2003-03-08 15:23 ` QoS Franco Antonio Catena 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: hare ram @ 2003-03-08 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Wittenberg, Netfilter Hi AFAIK, If the First Link down, the total traffic will move to Other Second Link, if you are configure and load balancing the Link If you make the static routes , them the traffic will be dead If you made the Loadbalance the both the links, then it will take some time to clear the routecache, once fresh route cache build you will have the fresh routes, so all the traffic will move towards active link. hare ----- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Wittenberg" <daniel-wittenberg@starken.com> To: "Netfilter" <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 12:36 PM Subject: equalize traffic when link is down > If you use equalize with 2 default gateways (like 2 ISP's), and one of > them goes down, what happens to the traffic? Will it automatically go > out the one up link, or will some traffic fail to go out? > > Dan > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [SPAM-RATING-1] Re: equalize traffic when link is down 2003-03-08 7:53 ` hare ram @ 2003-03-08 7:40 ` Daniel Wittenberg 2003-03-08 11:16 ` hare ram 2003-03-08 15:23 ` QoS Franco Antonio Catena 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Daniel Wittenberg @ 2003-03-08 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Netfilter Ok, makes sense, so if we just drop the cache timeout (don't remember if you can configure that or not) then we can adjust the "switch-over" time in case the default is too high. Great, thanks! Dan On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 01:53, hare ram wrote: > Hi > > AFAIK, > > If the First Link down, the total traffic will move to Other Second Link, > if you are configure and load balancing the Link > > If you make the static routes , them the traffic will be dead > > If you made the Loadbalance the both the links, > then it will take some time to clear the routecache, once fresh route > cache build you will have the fresh routes, > so all the traffic will move towards active link. > > > hare ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [SPAM-RATING-1] Re: equalize traffic when link is down 2003-03-08 7:40 ` [SPAM-RATING-1] " Daniel Wittenberg @ 2003-03-08 11:16 ` hare ram 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: hare ram @ 2003-03-08 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Wittenberg, Netfilter Yes you can make some cron job for the testing the both links active or not if one of the things down, you can clear the route cache but who ever have been in the cached will be lost hare ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Wittenberg" <daniel-wittenberg@starken.com> To: "Netfilter" <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 1:10 PM Subject: Re: [SPAM-RATING-1] Re: equalize traffic when link is down > Ok, makes sense, so if we just drop the cache timeout (don't remember if > you can configure that or not) then we can adjust the "switch-over" time > in case the default is too high. > > Great, thanks! > Dan > > On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 01:53, hare ram wrote: > > Hi > > > > AFAIK, > > > > If the First Link down, the total traffic will move to Other Second Link, > > if you are configure and load balancing the Link > > > > If you make the static routes , them the traffic will be dead > > > > If you made the Loadbalance the both the links, > > then it will take some time to clear the routecache, once fresh route > > cache build you will have the fresh routes, > > so all the traffic will move towards active link. > > > > > > hare > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* QoS 2003-03-08 7:53 ` hare ram 2003-03-08 7:40 ` [SPAM-RATING-1] " Daniel Wittenberg @ 2003-03-08 15:23 ` Franco Antonio Catena 2003-03-08 20:31 ` QoS SBlaze 2003-03-08 22:37 ` IPTABLES so estrange Franco Antonio Catena 1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Franco Antonio Catena @ 2003-03-08 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Netfilter' Hi fellows Its possible to do something LIKE QoS or CBQ using IPTABLES ?? I want to control the amount of Kbps per port in INBOUND and OUTBOUND directions thanks --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 25/2/2003 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: QoS 2003-03-08 15:23 ` QoS Franco Antonio Catena @ 2003-03-08 20:31 ` SBlaze 2003-03-08 22:37 ` IPTABLES so estrange Franco Antonio Catena 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: SBlaze @ 2003-03-08 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Franco Antonio Catena, 'Netfilter' --- Franco Antonio Catena <facatena@surson.com.br> wrote: > Hi fellows > > > Its possible to do something LIKE QoS or CBQ using IPTABLES ?? I want to > control the amount of Kbps per port in INBOUND and OUTBOUND directions > > thanks > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 25/2/2003 > > > I believe this can better help you than iptables...as iptables is just a firewall soloution... you are looking more for a routing soloution http://lartc.org/ ===== "No touchy NO TOUCHY! Emperor Kuzko -=Emperor's New Groove=-" __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* IPTABLES so estrange 2003-03-08 15:23 ` QoS Franco Antonio Catena 2003-03-08 20:31 ` QoS SBlaze @ 2003-03-08 22:37 ` Franco Antonio Catena 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Franco Antonio Catena @ 2003-03-08 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Franco Antonio Catena', 'Netfilter' Hi, I have a linux box with 2 netcardas eth0 External and eth1 intternal. I want that apache runs in port 81 instead of 80 becouse I have a nat forwarding to IIS. The problem is that the script dont work. Im not able to telnet from internal address to port 81. The Apache was started but I dont know why I cant telnet 192.168.1.1 81? for i in `ls /lib/modules/2.4.18-2cl/kernel/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip*|cut -f \ 3 -d "."|cut -f 6 -d "/"|grep -v ipchains`;do modprobe $i;done #modprobe ip_tables #insmod ip_conntrack #insmod ip_conntrack_ftp #modprobe ipt_LOG #modprobe ipt_multi[Bport #modprobe ipt_REJECT #modprobe ipt_MASQUERADE iptables -F # Politicas default iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 --fragment -p icmp -j LOG --log-prefix "Fragmented ICMP: " iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 --fragment -p icmp -j DROP iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 3128 -j LOG --log-prefix "USO DO SQUID " iptables -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 -p tcp --dport 81 -j LOG --log-prefix "WEB INTERNA " iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -m multiport -p tcp --dport 21,22,25,53,80,81,110,500,3128 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 -m multiport -p tcp -d 192.168.1.1 --dport 21,22,25,53,80,81,110,500,3128 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -m multiport -p udp --dport 21,25,53,80,110,500 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 -p tcp --dport 81 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -j ACCEPT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 3128 -j DROP iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "FIREWALL : INPUT " iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j DROP # Regras de Saida iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 443 --sport 1024:65535 -j ACCEPT #Bloqueando saida NETbios iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m multiport -p tcp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j DROP iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m multiport -p udp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j DROP iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # NAT #iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -j NAT --to-dest 192.168.1.1 -d apache.surson.com.br -p tvp iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -j DNAT --to-dest 192.168.1.2 -i eth0 -p tcp -m multiport --dport 21,25,80,110,3389,137,50,51,1723 #iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --dst apache.surson.com.br -p TCP --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.1 # Masquerade #iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -d 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -j LOG --log-prefix "Firewall VPN " iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -d \! 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -j MASQUERADE # Bloqueio de saida de pacotes do tipo Windows Networking iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -m multiport -p tcp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j LOG --log-prefix " Fire BLOQ TCP NETBIOS " iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -m multiport -p udp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j LOG --log-prefix " Fire BLOQ UDP NETBIOS " iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -m multiport -p tcp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j DROP iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -m multiport -p udp --dport 135,137,138,139 -j DROP # Forwarding para saida iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.1/24 -d ! 192.168.1.1 -p tcp --dport 3128 -j DROP iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.1/24 -d ! 192.168.1.1 -p tcp --dport 8080 -j DROP iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -j ACCEPT # Kernel Level echo "32768" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_conntrack_max echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_abort_on_overflow echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_ignore_bogus_error_responses echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward for i in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/rp_filter do echo 0 > $i done for i in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/log_martians do echo 1 > $i done --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 25/2/2003 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-03-08 22:37 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-03-08 7:06 equalize traffic when link is down Daniel Wittenberg 2003-03-08 7:53 ` hare ram 2003-03-08 7:40 ` [SPAM-RATING-1] " Daniel Wittenberg 2003-03-08 11:16 ` hare ram 2003-03-08 15:23 ` QoS Franco Antonio Catena 2003-03-08 20:31 ` QoS SBlaze 2003-03-08 22:37 ` IPTABLES so estrange Franco Antonio Catena
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox