Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 23:49:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Vincent Poy <vince@venus.GAIANET.NET> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How to add route Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980904234533.1910N-100000@venus.GAIANET.NET> In-Reply-To: <35F19004.88A643C0@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 5 Sep 1998, Wes Peters wrote: > > > > each T1 is on a separate interface. What I meant to say was is there a > > > > way around the route add default to be pointing to only one interface or > > > > IP like making all packets from 208.164.68.0/24 go out of eth0 and > > > > 209.84.252.0/24 go out of eth1. Each interface does have it's own IP. > > > > > > have you read http://www.netaxs.com/~freedman/multi.html? > > > (that and other links at http://www.mindspring.com/~jlindsay/bgp.html) > > > > Just read it... My concerns is not incoming packets not coming in > > correctly since each CIDR/24 block comes in on the correct circuit as the > > IPs belong to each provider. What I want to know is how to set routes so > > that depending on which CIDR/24 block a packet from my LAN is coming from, > > which circuit it will use to get the packet out since right now, all > > packets going out would be using only one circuit. > > One simple way to do this is to use two routers, one for each external > interface. > You can then select which circuit is used by pointing the default route > on the client machines at the appropriate router. When using old PC hardware > and FreeBSD, routers become pretty cheap. ;^) I wouldn't say it's cheap since the ET 4 Port PCI card costed close to $2500 plus the cost of the AMD K6-233 Machine with 128 megs of RAM. The interfaces are all part of the machine so it's not really possible to use two routers unless each router did it's own T1. > The other solution would be to NOT define a default route on the router, > but rather to configure gated with both interfaces in Silent or Active > mode, and let the learned routes take care of the problem for you. > These would still be routed by destination, not by source, but the > overall effect should be to balance the load according to the "costs" of > the routes. Hmmm, this sounds like a idea but is there a good Gated resource around? > This conversation is much more appropriate for the freebsd-net mailing > list, so I've cc'ed it over there. Please rejoin the thread there, if > necessary. This is a good point since it was on the wrong list originally. Cheers, Vince - vince@MCESTATE.COM - vince@GAIANET.NET ________ __ ____ Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ] GaiaNet Corporation - M & C Estate / / / / | / | __] ] Beverly Hills, California USA 90210 / / / / / |/ / | __] ] HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980904234533.1910N-100000>