From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 21:06:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7D2106566B for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 21:06:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Ggatten@waddell.com) Received: from mailhost0.waddell.com (mailhost0.waddell.com [12.154.38.61]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3507B8FC13 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 21:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from emlpfilt2.waddell.com (emlpfilt2.waddell.com [10.1.10.30]) by mailhost0.waddell.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA6450867; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:06:01 -0600 (CST) Received: from emlpfilt2.waddell.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 9F8CD2F8002; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:06:01 -0600 (CST) Received: from WADPHTCAS0.waddell.com (wadphtcas0.waddell.com [192.168.203.229]) by emlpfilt2.waddell.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D75A2F8001; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:06:01 -0600 (CST) Received: from WADPMBXV0.waddell.com ([169.254.1.151]) by WADPHTCAS0.waddell.com ([192.168.203.229]) with mapi; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:06:01 -0600 From: Gary Gatten To: 'Leonardo Santagostini' Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:06:00 -0600 Thread-Topic: Multiple tun loadbalancing question Thread-Index: AcuAT+oiZUbys0+uRGmThtG1RnJhTAAAU7Ug Message-ID: <1065_1289336761_4CD9B7B9_1065_274_1_D9B37353831173459FDAA836D3B43499A7AF8C11@WADPMBXV0.waddell.com> References: <20407_1289335707_4CD9B39B_20407_70_1_D9B37353831173459FDAA836D3B43499A7AF8C0F@WADPMBXV0.waddell.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Nathan Vidican , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Subject: RE: Multiple tun loadbalancing question X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:06:07 -0000 If three different providers, then to my knowledge you are SOL - mlppp is n= ot an option - unless someone here knows something I don't - which is 100% = likely :) Now, that said you can configure your routing to split the traffic amongst = different connections - so traffic to/from certain hosts use connection A, = other hosts use B, etc. You can even get fancy and route based on applicat= ion and host if you wish. Ci$co calls this Policy Based Routing. I'm not = sure if FBSD or another package such as pf allows similar functionality. M= y guess would be yes - but I don't know anything about that. As for "bonding" or aggregating your connections to appear as a single one = - not an option AFAIK. G ________________________________ From: Leonardo Santagostini [mailto:lsantagostini@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 2:52 PM To: Gary Gatten Cc: Chuck Swiger; Nathan Vidican; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multiple tun loadbalancing question Hello all, Im using 3 different providers all from Argentina, Clora, Movistar and Pers= onal. Thank you Leonardo Santagostini 2010/11/9 Gary Gatten > Also, may be obvious to point out, but all (3) connections "must" be from t= he same provider. In the lab you could MAYBE get a stable/usable connectio= n from multiple providers (with just ppp or 'x' encap) by splitting the req= uests on the egress side - but it's highly unlikely in the real world. In = most cases the traffic load is asymmetrical and heavily biased towards ingr= ess traffic, so even if you could get it to "work" - it wouldn't provide mu= ch benefit. Just curious, what provider are you using?
"This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system."