From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Nov 14 17:14:10 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC1A37B401 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:14:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from satin.sensation.net.au (c16494.brodm1.vic.optusnet.com.au [210.49.158.113]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48AD43E8A for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:14:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rowan@sensation.net.au) Received: from satin.sensation.net.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by satin.sensation.net.au (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gAF1DuxV091631 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:13:56 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from rowan@sensation.net.au) Received: from localhost (rowan@localhost) by satin.sensation.net.au (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id gAF1DtIG091628 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:13:55 +1100 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: satin.sensation.net.au: rowan owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:13:55 +1100 (EST) From: Rowan Crowe To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Load balancing two unrelated links In-Reply-To: <200211150053.gAF0rNwZ045349@spooky.eis.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Ernie Elu wrote: [...] > > Then you should install gated (or similar) and enable OSPF on the > > FreeBSD machines over the two links. Dynamic routing is the only thing > > which can help you. I've seen this mentioned before, but I have never actually seen _FreeBSD_ do it. I was under the impression that realtime load balancing (ie link sharing) was more about the kernel, rather than a routing protocol. Another thing, I don't know whether this will be a practical issue: because the two links are not identical media you may have differing latency and usable bandwidth. If you just alternate packets between links, they may arrive out of order. I was fooling around with this problem a couple of years ago, and I was experimenting with route cloning. My memory is a little hazy, but I *think* it was possible to do something like: route change -cloning default x.x.x.x All packets that matched the default route had a specific route installed. If you can set up something to switch the default between two routes based on average load, then routes will be cached and all traffic for a specific IP will go via its chosen link. It's pretty kludgy though, your route table will be huge, and it will only work well with a large number of routes (ie useless inbound if you're only sending to a handful of IPs) Hope this at least inspires, if it doesn't actually help... ;) Cheers. -- Rowan Crowe - Melbourne, Australia www.camrecord.com www.camdiscover.com www.heyasl.com www.sensationbot.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message