Thanks guys, On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Joseph Hardeman <jwharde...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > route add -net 192.168.1.16 netmask 255.255.255.240 gw 10.0.0.1 > A simple route doesn't work in this case, as the packets have to leave out the correct interface as well, or they will be dropped by the reverse-path-checking. Linux will route them correctly be default, but they will still always leave out the interface with the default gateway. > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Jon Watte <jwa...@imvu.com> wrote: >> >> Does the internal network need a gateway at all? The internal network is routed throughout the campus, so I may have backend servers with private IPs, which aren't in my subnet. This isn't the end of the world if it's unsolvable, as I can request that all load-balancing service IPs be public for now, and spin up another haproxy pair for private services if there is a specific requirement. I was just hoping there was some kernel sysctl or ip parameter that could effect routing performance. I'm kind of curious as to why this ip rule impacts performance so much. Maybe reassigning the outgoing interface is expensive? Thanks, -jim
