Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:49:38 -0800 From: rick norman <rick.norman@lmco.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Nat through two DSL Message-ID: <3C110131.CF806ED2@lmco.com> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011207131945.009fe1d0@mail.training.telia.se> <3C10F658.6070001@isi.edu> <20011207170742.GB80922@virtual-voodoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What would be nice would be to load balance on a per connection basis, not a per packet basis, between the two modems. Any ideas how to do this ? Rick Steve Ames wrote: > On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 09:03:20AM -0800, Lars Eggert wrote: > > Anders Hagman wrote: > > > > >I want to load share between two ADSL modems using a NAT/Firewall. > > > > > >Computer 1 \ > > > \ /-- ADSL 1 > > > \ / > > >Computer 2 ------ Wireless LAN --- Firewall/NAT - > > > . / \ > > > . / \-- ADSL 2 > > >Computer 10/ > > > > > >The ADSL are 500k links and I want to load share on session by session. > > >Can I do NAT between an inside interface and two outside interfaces > > >acting in a round robin fashion? > > > > This may not be the good idea you'd think on first glance. If one of the > > paths has a slightly different RTT (and they're pretty much guaranteed > > to), you'll see out-of-order delivery at the receiver. I remember seeing > > some study that showed that TCP doesn't react too nicely under such > > conditions (it works, but not at peak performance). > > Is it even possible to do use two upstream paths for redundancy? I tried > (very briefly while I had two broadband connections while switching from > one to the other) to get that to work and wasn't very successful. > > -Steve > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C110131.CF806ED2>