Matthew Dillon wrote:
:I've done that running mpd to split the load over the tunnels from the
:colo.
:
:if either tunnel goes down mpd hickups nd hten everything keeps going..
:..
:mpd does this for me..
That looks almost perfect for the colo idea. I see how the links are
set up and I see the bundle directive, but how do I configure a common
subnet? Do I specify the same subnet for all the links and make them
part of the same bundle (on both ends)?
Is there a way to backhaul the bundle onto a single TUN interface?
Or is that what ng_eiface is for? I need a tie-in for PF's QOS.
There's no choice about that, my network is 100% saturated 24x7 and
if I don't use PF's QOS with fair-share scheduling it becomes unusable.
the ng_iface that is created (ng0 or whatever) is the virtual
connection back to the colo. now that we have multiple routing tables
we can make the tunnel and its contents use different routing tables
which can simplify things.
mpd allows you to backhaul through udp or tcp transport 'tunnels' to
the remote poitn of your choice.
Looks like I might have to update netgraph on DFly to use mpd, but it
doesn't look too difficult. But, gods, all those M_NOWAIT kernel
mallocs... how can that possibly be reliable?
what can I say without degenerating into a dogfight?
The code is designed to copy with failure to allocate.. the error will
propogate up..
not much is allocated once you have it set up.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
