Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-16 Thread crispin
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 12:45:24PM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
 On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  In TCP/IP we only have control of our outgoing traffic. Thus your
  connections will be set up via one or the other. Say your wireless
  device is 128k and your modem is 56k. With this sort of primative
  balancing you initiate a download. It comes down at 56k. It doesn't get
  any faster. Then you start another. It comes in at 128K with the first
  still going at 56K. You will *never* get a 184K download. Each
  connection is identified by its source and dest ip's and your IP's are
  different. 
 
 I think that would be OK, as long as I can utilize both links; say, web
 traffic via the wireless link, and the other via the modem.
 
 I have take a look into iproute doc, and to have two default routes is
 as simple as:
 ip route add default nexthop eth0 nexthop ppp0
 
 Question is, really?
 I read somewhere on the Net that by having that configuration, you'd get
 outgoing traffic via both devices, but incoming via the first one. 
 
 Would it be easier just to split the traffic according to the protocols?
 Say, email through eth0 and web through the ppp0. Maybe the use of the
 links wouldn't be that optimal, but at least I can get some additional
 bandwidth. But what about that default route; how can I set it up after 
 I split the traffic?

The best way to do this is again QoS. You create queues for your traffic, each 
with a queueing discipline. eg. You might have an email queue, a web queue, an 
emergency packet queue (which gets priority for low-latency. eg. gaming 
packets, shell traffic) and an everything else queue. You can control where 
these queues go and what the queueing method is, and how things are sorted in 
the queue.

You then use classifyers to classify your traffic into these queues. So create 
a set of rules that match email, that match web, that match priority packets, 
and everything else. 

Classifiers are good because you can classify based on so many things, not just 
destination IP or port. You can build many hierachal levels of these. Queues 
that empty into queues that empty into... You may choose to dump these queues 
into two pFIFO queues, one for ppp0 and one for eth0. A lot of it is trial and 
error, testing and running a sniffer on the links to see how things are being 
handled.

Have a look at ... for more information

As for the return paths, if the packets going out ppp0 have a source ip of ppp0 
and the packets going out eth0 have a source ip of eth0, then the return 
traffic will be (quasi) balanced across the two links according to how the 
outgoing was balanced. So if your POP3 requests are going out via ppp0 with its 
IP as source IP then the downloaded mail will be coming back via that link.

Its definately do-able. There's a bit of work involved, a lot of crazy command 
lines you've never ever seen before. The documentation is a bit light on the 
howto or tutorial side of things, but if you understand the basics, and are 
patient, theres no reason why it cant be done. A lot of the docs say they are 
for 2.4 series kernels, but they can equaly be applied to 2.2 series.

Kind Regards
Crispin



Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-16 Thread crispin
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:34:00PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Have a look at ... for more information
 

Sorry :) Forgot to paste in URL's

http://qos.ittc.ukans.edu/
http://www.qosforum.com/docs/faq/
http://www.fibrespeed.net/~mbabcock/linux/qos_tc/
http://qos.ittc.ukans.edu/howto/
http://www.ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/

Kind Regards
Crispin



eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-15 Thread Oki DZ
Hi,

Would it be possible to bind /dev/tunl0 and /dev/eth0 under eql? I mean,
I'd like to have more bandwidth out from both devices.
The packets will traverse two different default routes, I guess. 

TIA,
Oki




Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-15 Thread crispin
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 04:18:56PM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Would it be possible to bind /dev/tunl0 and /dev/eth0 under eql? I mean,
 I'd like to have more bandwidth out from both devices.
 The packets will traverse two different default routes, I guess. 
 

Recently I gave eql a try to spread load across two links that I controlled 
both ends of. I had lots of problems and I believe eql has not been actively 
maintained in the kernel for a long time. The enslaving of links works for 
outbound, but not for inbound traffic. I was able to use the 
/proc/.../rp_filter set to 0 to allow the backtraffic through, but it was in no 
way 'balanced'.

Then I used the teql queueing discipline in the QoS services. This works much 
better, is more configurable and actively maintained and documented. Basically 
eql is a poor mans teql.

So I suggest reading up on the QoS support in the kernel. It also helps to 
control both ends of your link (rather than two seperate connections to an ISP)

Kind Regards
Crispin Wellington
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-15 Thread Oki DZ
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Recently I gave eql a try to spread load across two links that I
 controlled both ends of. I had lots of problems and I believe eql has
 not been actively maintained in the kernel for a long time. The
 enslaving of links works for outbound, but not for inbound traffic. I
 was able to use the /proc/.../rp_filter set to 0 to allow the
 backtraffic through, but it was in no way 'balanced'.  

But my problem is how to split traffic to the Internet via two devices.
The first one, eth0 is a wireless device, the second one tunl0 is a
IP tunnel (which I have to set up yet) via a ppp0 device on another
machine (the ppp0 connects to an ISP). 

The main idea is how to add more bandwidth to that eth0 using the modem,
but I don't want to have a lot of editing on the firewall/NAT scripts
(that are already on the machine which has the eth0).

Oki




Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-15 Thread crispin
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:58:32AM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
 On Tue, 15 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Recently I gave eql a try to spread load across two links that I
  controlled both ends of. I had lots of problems and I believe eql has
  not been actively maintained in the kernel for a long time. The
  enslaving of links works for outbound, but not for inbound traffic. I
  was able to use the /proc/.../rp_filter set to 0 to allow the
  backtraffic through, but it was in no way 'balanced'.  
 
 But my problem is how to split traffic to the Internet via two devices.
 The first one, eth0 is a wireless device, the second one tunl0 is a
 IP tunnel (which I have to set up yet) via a ppp0 device on another
 machine (the ppp0 connects to an ISP). 
 
 The main idea is how to add more bandwidth to that eth0 using the modem,
 but I don't want to have a lot of editing on the firewall/NAT scripts
 (that are already on the machine which has the eth0).

The problem is that the eth0 and ppp0 (and thus tunl0) have different IP 
numbers and look to the routing infrastructure of the internet like two 
different computers. A packet leaving your site will have to choose one of them 
as its source IP. The return packets for that connection will have their dest 
IP set to that source IP and will be routed through the net accordingly to 
either your eth0 or ppp0. They wont be split between the two.

In TCP/IP we only have control of our outgoing traffic. Thus your connections 
will be set up via one or the other. Say your wireless device is 128k and your 
modem is 56k. With this sort of primative balancing you initiate a download. It 
comes down at 56k. It doesn't get any faster. Then you start another. It comes 
in at 128K with the first still going at 56K. You will *never* get a 184K 
download. Each connection is identified by its source and dest ip's and your 
IP's are different.

If you control both ends of the link then you can achieve the 184K, by 
re-bundling the connection on the other side. So then both links end in the 
same IP's on the same machine at the ISP.

There are other ways of doing this but your ISP has to co-operate. OSPF equal 
cost multipath is one way (but the links must be similar speed) and full BGP4 
is another (but you'll need an ASN and its a crazy amount of work.)

Kind Regards
Crispin



Re: eql = tun + eth0

2002-01-15 Thread Oki DZ
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 In TCP/IP we only have control of our outgoing traffic. Thus your
 connections will be set up via one or the other. Say your wireless
 device is 128k and your modem is 56k. With this sort of primative
 balancing you initiate a download. It comes down at 56k. It doesn't get
 any faster. Then you start another. It comes in at 128K with the first
 still going at 56K. You will *never* get a 184K download. Each
 connection is identified by its source and dest ip's and your IP's are
 different. 

I think that would be OK, as long as I can utilize both links; say, web
traffic via the wireless link, and the other via the modem.

I have take a look into iproute doc, and to have two default routes is
as simple as:
ip route add default nexthop eth0 nexthop ppp0

Question is, really?
I read somewhere on the Net that by having that configuration, you'd get
outgoing traffic via both devices, but incoming via the first one. 

Would it be easier just to split the traffic according to the protocols?
Say, email through eth0 and web through the ppp0. Maybe the use of the
links wouldn't be that optimal, but at least I can get some additional
bandwidth. But what about that default route; how can I set it up after 
I split the traffic?

Oki




EQL with Broadband

2000-11-12 Thread Brandt Dusthimer



 Is it possible to do EQL with 
broadband?

 Brandt Dusthimer


Configuracion de EQL

1999-12-21 Thread Maximiliano Kolus
Hello!

En la empresa donde trabajo actualmente pusimos un proxy con un debian
2.1, kernel 2.2.13, contamos con dos lineas telefonicas y dos modems
Motorola ModemSurfr 56k externos, ambos configurados y andando.

Lo que quiero hacer es aprovechar ambos modems para de alguna forma
sumar el ancho de banda, para eso estoy viendo de utilizar EQL. Al
hacerlo me he encontrado con los siguientes problemas:

* Mi ISP es *casi seguro* que no soporta EQL, y la documentacion me
confunde, he visto documentacion que dice que es un requerimiento que el
ISP soporte EQL, y otros documentos que dicen que si el ISP no tiene EQL no
se tiene la 'maxima performance'.

* En la documentacion hablan de levantar una interface 'eql', pero en mi
caso necesito saber si la direccion de IP de dicha interfaz tiene que ser
de la intranet (192.168.2.xxx) o de internet... En caso de que sea la
ultima opcion, esta direccion de IP tienen que ser alguna de las que se
asignaron a ppp0 y ppp1 o una completamente diferente?

Aca mando como se ven las conexiones:

ppp0  Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
  inet addr:209.13.200.224  P-t-P:209.13.170.148  Mask:255.255.255.255
  UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP SLAVE MULTICAST  MTU:1524  Metric:1
  RX packets:25793 errors:13 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:13
  TX packets:27440 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
  collisions:0 txqueuelen:10

ppp1  Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
  inet addr:209.13.200.176  P-t-P:209.13.170.147  Mask:255.255.255.255
  UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP SLAVE MULTICAST  MTU:1524  Metric:1
  RX packets:24 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
  TX packets:41 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
  collisions:0 txqueuelen:10

Y la tabla de ruteo actual:

Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface
209.13.170.148  0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH0  00 ppp0
209.13.170.147  0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH0  00 ppp1
192.168.4.0 192.168.2.200   255.255.255.0   UG0  00 eth0
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0   U 0  00 eth0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0  00 ppp0

Alguien lo uso alguna vez? que resultados obtuvo?


Maximiliano Kolus
Webmaster / Programmer
http://www.tlh.com.ar
Not Lumber Cartel Unit 1994 (TINLC)
ICQ: 21902432


Re: eql

1999-11-06 Thread Lindsay Allen
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, steve j . kondik wrote:

 i've been trying to get eql working on a potato box without much luck.
 the two ppp links come up fine (and i've set nodefaultroute in the options),
 i do and ifconfig eql up ip, eql_enslave eql pppx 57600 for each of the
 links, then route add default eql, and it refuses to route.  the isp
 is set up correctly to handle the connection, and it is a static ip.  if
 anyone has any experience with this, or could point me to some better
 documentation, i'd appreciate it.

Some rough notes at http://mentor.cbcfreo.wa.edu.au/~allen/eqlnotes/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 2486   32.0125S 115.8445E   Debian Linux
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



eql

1999-11-05 Thread steve j . kondik
i've been trying to get eql working on a potato box without much luck.
the two ppp links come up fine (and i've set nodefaultroute in the options),
i do and ifconfig eql up ip, eql_enslave eql pppx 57600 for each of the
links, then route add default eql, and it refuses to route.  the isp
is set up correctly to handle the connection, and it is a static ip.  if
anyone has any experience with this, or could point me to some better
documentation, i'd appreciate it.

thanks!
-steve


EQL problems - Update

1999-04-28 Thread Chad C. Walstrom
Chewie here, with a quick update on the EQL problems I was having.  In
case  you hadn't seen the previous post, here's a quick synopsis.  I
had compiled the 2.2.5 kernel with eql support, initiated my two modem
connections with no (absolutely NO) compression, and enslaved the
devices to the eql device.  My routing table was set up correctly, and
I watched the tcpdump on each device to find that data was being sent
and received, but just not finalized.  The initiating program didn't
receive packets...they seemed to disappear somewhere between the modem
device and the eql device.

Well, since I had done everything right, as according to documentation
and the advice of a friend, we decided to go back to the 2.0.36
kernel.  Lo-and-behold, it worked!  After establishing a stable eql
environment, I applied the firewall and masquerading rules to make the
connection LAN accessible.  Mission accomplished.

The short and long of it, eql on kernels newer than 2.0.36 should be
assumed to be broken until further notice.  I will be reporting the
bug to the tracker sometime tomorrow morning.

Chewie

AKA: Chad Walstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux user since 2.0.32


EQL problems

1999-04-27 Thread Chad C. Walstrom
Objective:  
Use eql tools to utilize bandwidth of two modems for
connectivity and provide masquerading for local LAN

Progress: 
Just trying to get eql to work w/out masquerading or
firewall options enabled...(Default policy = ACCEPT)

Materials Read: 
RTFM on NET-3-HOWTO.gz, IP-Masquerading.gz,
../linux/Documentation/eql.txt, various posts, 
IP-Chains-HOWTO.gz (Jan '99).

Details:
* Successful connection to provider w/both modems
* Successful eql_enslave of both modems to eql device
* Routing tables configured as described in documentation
(route add default dev eql)
* Standard ping to immediate upstream works...

Problem:
* Will not combine packet buffers from separate modems into
one virtual device (eql)

Notes:
I performed a standard ping to a known IP address in Internet space.
The tcpdump of the eql device revealed each packet being received and
transmitted to the modem devices -- ppp0 and ppp1.  The tcpdump ppp1
revealed EVERY ICMP ECHO_REQUEST being transfered over this device, no
ECHO_REPLY.  The tcpdump of ppp0 was opposite...all replies, no
requests.  The ping did not resolve.  I can only assume that the eql
device is not re-combining the enslaved devices return communication
into one buffer and passing it on to the calling program...

Likewise, a telnet session was attempted in the same manner...no go.

Any takers?

Chewie


Re: EQL question

1999-03-11 Thread Craig T. Hancock
I ma just curious what is EQL


Froilan C. Mendoza wrote:

 Hello!

 Would like to ask if it's possible to have two or more EQL connections to
 a server? .. we have one existing EQL connection to our server (using two
 modems) and we are intending to put up a couple of connections using EQL.

 Thanks in advanced.

 Sincerely,

 Froilan C. Mendoza
 Systems Administrator
 Network Tracking and Implementation
 Tridel Technologies, Inc.

 --
 Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null


Re: EQL question

1999-03-11 Thread servis
*- On 10 Mar, Craig T. Hancock wrote about Re: EQL question
 I ma just curious what is EQL
 


  EQL Driver: Serial IP Load Balancing HOWTO
  Simon Guru Aleph-Null Janes, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  v1.1, February 27, 1995

  This is the manual for the EQL device driver. EQL is a software device
  that lets you load-balance IP serial links (SLIP or uncompressed PPP)
  to increase your bandwidth. It will not reduce your latency (i.e. ping
  times) except in the case where you already have lots of traffic on
  your link, in which it will help them out.


-- 
Brian 
-
Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes,  
 because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes. 
   - unknown  

Mechanical Engineering[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Purdue University   http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis
-


EQL question

1999-03-10 Thread Froilan C. Mendoza

Hello!

Would like to ask if it's possible to have two or more EQL connections to
a server? .. we have one existing EQL connection to our server (using two
modems) and we are intending to put up a couple of connections using EQL.

Thanks in advanced.


Sincerely, 

Froilan C. Mendoza  
Systems Administrator
Network Tracking and Implementation
Tridel Technologies, Inc.


EQL PPP Load balancing

1998-11-08 Thread dman
Has anyone used EQL with USR Total Control Terminal Server.
I can connect twice to the term server and get the same IP and such
but i have alot of problems with route anyone have any docs besides the
NET-3-How-TO?

Dinesh


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-27 Thread Lindsay Allen

On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:

 My testing has been with 2.0.34 on both ends. Have you tried it on
 that version Lindsay?

Yes, fine on .34.
 
 On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 10:26:48PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
  ALso, maybe I am misunderstanding you but I thought that eql was only
  designed for serial devices. Also note that both network interfaces need
  the same IP address.  In other words, if you have two dialup connections,
  they both need to be the SAME IP Address for EQL to work.
 
 Hmmm. I got the impression that it should work on any link. They use
 plip as an example in the doco, I think. I did try it with the same IP
 on both links (a bit weird on ethernet but anyway) and didn't seem to 
 get anywhere further. I'll try again soon and check out the kernel list.

Hmm, I think they talk about slip rather than plip.  I would not have
dreampt of trying it with ethernet, but why not?

 
From: Marsh Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 The thing with eql is you need a linux box on both ends of the
 connections.  Our company put a linux box out at our ISP's site
 so we can use eql.  They're a small ISP and easy to work with.

Not correct.  Livingston Portmasters support eql.  My problem is that my
ISP has four PMs and as I dial in through a rotary it is pot luck as to
which box I get.  eql requires that all lines be to the same box and
that's where it gets difficult and expensive.  I now have FreeBSD 2.2.6
here and will try that. 

I followed up the altavista idea and found Michael Bruck's web page
http://mp.ins-coin.de/ but he has dropped the project due to lack of time.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Linux
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-26 Thread Lindsay Allen

On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Debian Mailing List wrote:

 
 hi there i am a newbie and was wondering if anyone has or know how to use
 two modems or more to dial up to a isp and bond all the lines together..
 
 my isp currently uses ascend dial-up servers and supports 56k modems
 
 --kim 

Using here quite successfully.  But check with your provider that he has
only one box as both modems must be connected to the same box.  If he has
multiple boxes you might have to make a lot of calls to achieve this.

What we need is multi-link ppp.  Available (so I'm told) for FreeBSD and
W95 but not for Linux.

There is an eql package.  Contact me by email if you need help.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Linux
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-26 Thread Ian Eure
On Fri, Jun 26, 1998 at 08:19:55AM +0800, Lindsay Allen wrote:
 
 On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Debian Mailing List wrote:
 
  
  hi there i am a newbie and was wondering if anyone has or know how to use
  two modems or more to dial up to a isp and bond all the lines together..
  
  my isp currently uses ascend dial-up servers and supports 56k modems
  
  --kim 
 
 Using here quite successfully.  But check with your provider that he has
 only one box as both modems must be connected to the same box.  If he has
 multiple boxes you might have to make a lot of calls to achieve this.
 
 What we need is multi-link ppp.  Available (so I'm told) for FreeBSD and
 W95 but not for Linux.
Hmm, no... There is support for the (semi?) standard multilink ppp protocol
under development... It is not in the standard kernel yet, and I don't remember
the www site, but an altavista search for ppp multilink protocol +linux
should get it for you.

-- 
 __
| ian eure, network admin, freelance security consultant, and  |
| manically depressed paranoid schizophrenic, at your service. |
;   [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://minion.org ;
:   raw speed = 105.6 wpm with 4.5% errors :
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-26 Thread Hamish Moffatt
On Fri, Jun 26, 1998 at 08:19:55AM +0800, Lindsay Allen wrote:
 Using here quite successfully.  But check with your provider that he has
 only one box as both modems must be connected to the same box.  If he has
 multiple boxes you might have to make a lot of calls to achieve this.
 
 What we need is multi-link ppp.  Available (so I'm told) for FreeBSD and
 W95 but not for Linux.
 
 There is an eql package.  Contact me by email if you need help.

I couldn't find the package but I compiled the source off sunsite ok
(I think, some source hacks required) on a bo system. I'm trying to play
around with parallel ethernet. One of the networks is my regular
ethernet, the other is another I've added between two machines.
I've configured the addresses and the second ethernet is working fine.
I eql_enslaved the devices on each end and added a route to the eql
device, but can't ping and there's no sign of any traffic being sent.
/proc/net/dev lists lots of packets being dropped on the eql device,
nothing sent or received.

Any ideas?


thanks,
Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.   http://hamish.home.ml.org


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-26 Thread Hamish Moffatt
My testing has been with 2.0.34 on both ends. Have you tried it on
that version Lindsay?

On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 10:26:48PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
 ALso, maybe I am misunderstanding you but I thought that eql was only
 designed for serial devices. Also note that both network interfaces need
 the same IP address.  In other words, if you have two dialup connections,
 they both need to be the SAME IP Address for EQL to work.

Hmmm. I got the impression that it should work on any link. They use
plip as an example in the doco, I think. I did try it with the same IP
on both links (a bit weird on ethernet but anyway) and didn't seem to 
get anywhere further. I'll try again soon and check out the kernel list.


thanks
Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.   http://hamish.home.ml.org


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-26 Thread Marsh Ray

From: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 10:26:48PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
 they both need to be the SAME IP Address for EQL to work.

Hmmm. I got the impression that it should work on any link. They use
plip as an example in the doco, I think. I did try it with the same IP
on both links (a bit weird on ethernet but anyway) and didn't seem to 
get anywhere further. I'll try again soon and check out the kernel list.


The thing with eql is you need a linux box on both ends of the
connections.  Our company put a linux box out at our ISP's site
so we can use eql.  They're a small ISP and easy to work with.

Other ISPs might support multilink PPP but probably not eql.

- Marsh


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


ppp analog bonding w/ eql

1998-06-25 Thread Debian Mailing List

hi there i am a newbie and was wondering if anyone has or know how to use
two modems or more to dial up to a isp and bond all the lines together..

my isp currently uses ascend dial-up servers and supports 56k modems

--kim 


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


do I need EQL for a multi-modem connection?

1998-05-13 Thread Daniel Warren
Greetings,

I want to set up a small network using IP Masquarade over 2-4
phone lines, do I NEED eql, or can I set this up as two seperate PPP
connections and just let the machine route them independantly? Does this
cause any problems, or does it simply cause a less optimal use of the
lines? 

thank you for your time.

-Dan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-08 Thread Neilen Marais
Now, if I go to dual modems (or even three), is the box going to be
able
to keep up when servicing three 33K modems and doing DNS lookups and
running apache, squid, etc all at the same time?
Oh yeah, it will certianly keep up.  A local ISP used to run their
whole ISP on a 486dx4/100, with 32mb, using about 11 lines, running
squid, apache, mail etc server all of it, with the load seldom even
reaching .5.  The point is, that doing these kind of things use almost
no CPU


Lindsay
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Unix
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


Cheers
Neilen


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-05 Thread Lindsay Allen

Hi Kevin,

I worked it out yesterday.  My mistake was in not deleting the pppx
entries from the routing table.  Perfectly obvious in hindsight, but I do
wish that people writing documents would give more examples. 

The closest I have come to a Portmaster is looking one up in the price
list on Saturday.  Guess I will stick with Linux.  I guess they have to be
configured and that your IPS has not done it correctly.  Maybe the list
will come good.

I do need some expert advice in one area.  The school Linux box (P133) 
does everything at the moment and has a single modem link to the outside. 
Now, if I go to dual modems (or even three), is the box going to be able
to keep up when servicing three 33K modems and doing DNS lookups and
running apache, squid, etc all at the same time?

It would clearly be better to have smart card to service the modems but
they seems to be around $A900.  Another possibility is to use a spare
486/33 to handle the modems but, as we have only one IP address, that box
would have to have it and the Linux box would then be masqueraded behind
it (or use redir.)  It starts to seem really messy.

Getting back to eql, I thought of writing up a mini HOWTO on the subject,
but then I have zero experience with Livinston boxes or of using it with
SLiRP.  I would also like to hear of any experience with the situation
mentioned in the docs where he suggests a cron entry that runs every
minute of every hour to keep the thing up.

Lindsay
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Unix
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On Sat, 3 Jan 1998, Kevin Traas wrote:

   I have a fairly urgent need for load balancing two modems, but eql just
   does not work for me.  All the bits are in place but all traffic goes
 via
   ppp1.
  
  You must make sure that the hardware at the other end of the connection
  will also support load balancing (i.e. it must be a linux box, a
  Livingston port master with both connections on sequential ports, or
 shell
  accounts running SLiRP).
 
 
 Hello Lindsay.  Just wanted to say that I've just begun playing with EQL
 as well.  I've been meaning to do this for the past year or so, but never
 got around to it...  Anyway, after a few hours, I do have everything working
 and everything is great - except for one thing.
 
 While my end will send data out both ports just fine, I only get data back
 from my ISP on one of the ports (or the other).  It seems that I'll get data
 on one port (the first I brought up) for a random time and then it will
 switch over to the other / another port and data will come in from there for
 a while until it makes another change
 
 My ISP has a Livingston PM3 (which is supposed to work with EQL), and it
 *does* seem to work - except for that one (and, unfortunately, very
 important) thing above.
 
 With two modems, I get about 5KB/s via outgoing FTP, but I only get about
 3KB/s via incoming FTP.  (Even with this problem, I get better performance
 than with just one modem because all packet ACK's will go out the unused
 port which allows the FTP data stream to continue uninterupted.)
 
 Anyway, if you (or anyone) can help me out, or if I can help you out
 further, please let me know.  I'd be happy to share more details if
 requested.
 
 Later,
 Kevin
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
 Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
 
 



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-04 Thread Kevin Traas
  I have a fairly urgent need for load balancing two modems, but eql just
  does not work for me.  All the bits are in place but all traffic goes
via
  ppp1.
 
 You must make sure that the hardware at the other end of the connection
 will also support load balancing (i.e. it must be a linux box, a
 Livingston port master with both connections on sequential ports, or
shell
 accounts running SLiRP).


Hello Lindsay.  Just wanted to say that I've just begun playing with EQL
as well.  I've been meaning to do this for the past year or so, but never
got around to it...  Anyway, after a few hours, I do have everything working
and everything is great - except for one thing.

While my end will send data out both ports just fine, I only get data back
from my ISP on one of the ports (or the other).  It seems that I'll get data
on one port (the first I brought up) for a random time and then it will
switch over to the other / another port and data will come in from there for
a while until it makes another change

My ISP has a Livingston PM3 (which is supposed to work with EQL), and it
*does* seem to work - except for that one (and, unfortunately, very
important) thing above.

With two modems, I get about 5KB/s via outgoing FTP, but I only get about
3KB/s via incoming FTP.  (Even with this problem, I get better performance
than with just one modem because all packet ACK's will go out the unused
port which allows the FTP data stream to continue uninterupted.)

Anyway, if you (or anyone) can help me out, or if I can help you out
further, please let me know.  I'd be happy to share more details if
requested.

Later,
Kevin





--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-01 Thread Lindsay Allen

I have a fairly urgent need for load balancing two modems, but eql just
does not work for me.  All the bits are in place but all traffic goes via
ppp1.

There are quite a few steps in setting things up and I am wondering if
these things have to be done in a specific order.

How do I go about debugging this?

Is there a HOWTO or similar?  I have /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/README.eql
and I got hold of eql-1.2.tar.gz which has the source for eql_enslave.

The application is for a school which needs 64K bandwidth but ISDN is too
expensive at ~S7000/year in this part of the world.  Any help will be much
appreciated.

Lindsay 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Unix
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-01 Thread Dale Harrison
 Is there a HOWTO or similar?  I have /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/README.eql
 and I got hold of eql-1.2.tar.gz which has the source for eql_enslave.

It's in the NET-3 Howto.

  6.6.  EQL - multiple line traffic equaliser

 The application is for a school which needs 64K bandwidth but ISDN is too
 expensive at ~S7000/year in this part of the world.  Any help will be much
 appreciated.

Horrendous, isn't it? Long live Telstra eh? :)

D.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-01 Thread Lindsay Allen


  Is there a HOWTO or similar?  I have /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/README.eql
  and I got hold of eql-1.2.tar.gz which has the source for eql_enslave.
 
 It's in the NET-3 Howto.
 
   6.6.  EQL - multiple line traffic equaliser

Thanks - I missed that.  But I don't think the writer has actually tried
it.  He says eql_emancipate eql sl0 but eql_emancipate has not been
written yet.

I hope to hear from someone who _has_ tried it.

 
  The application is for a school which needs 64K bandwidth but ISDN is too
  expensive at ~S7000/year in this part of the world.  Any help will be much
  appreciated.
 
 Horrendous, isn't it? Long live Telstra eh? :)

I hope they choke.

 D.
 
Lindsay

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Unix
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL - all traffic is via ppp1

1998-01-01 Thread Lindsay Allen

On Wed, 31 Dec 1997, George Bonser wrote:

 On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Lindsay Allen wrote:
 
  
  I have a fairly urgent need for load balancing two modems, but eql just
  does not work for me.  All the bits are in place but all traffic goes via
  ppp1.
  
  There are quite a few steps in setting things up and I am wondering if
  these things have to be done in a specific order.
  
  How do I go about debugging this?
  
 
 You must make sure that the hardware at the other end of the connection
 will also support load balancing (i.e. it must be a linux box, a
 Livingston port master with both connections on sequential ports, or shell
 accounts running SLiRP).
 
 
 George Bonser 
 Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut? 
 http://www.debian.org
 Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.

Thanks, George.  I was not aware of the Livingston and SLiRP details.

At the moment I am just practising, using two Debian boxes in my shack
with a modem ppp0 connection and a null modem ppp1 (or vice versa.)  I
have run out of ideas.

Cheers,
Lindsay

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lindsay Allen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Perth, Western Australia
voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj  Debian Unix
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Help with EQL

1997-08-28 Thread Rowan Deppeler
 Hi All,

Could anyone point me towards documentation or help me with setting up EQL?

I have installed the module in kernel 2.0.30 without problems but do not
know where to go from there?

thanks

Rowan
-
Rowan Deppeler  System Administrator
Cybernex Networking
http://www.cybernex.net.au
VK3VW,VK3RCR



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: Help with EQL

1997-08-28 Thread Jim Pick

 Could anyone point me towards documentation or help me with setting up EQL?
 
 I have installed the module in kernel 2.0.30 without problems but do not
 know where to go from there?

There is some documentation in /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/README.eql that
you might have missed.  (from the Linux kernel source)

I've never used EQL myself.

Cheers,

 - Jim




pgp1jeiZJZLHR.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Again - Multilink PPP vs. EQL

1997-04-24 Thread R. Chris Ross


 To: Steve Hsieh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
After burrowing around some, I finally found some info and docs on
 EQL;
however, Multilink PPP is mentioned as a newer, and improved
 alternative.
   
Unfortunately, I can't find any info on Multilink PPP in the HowTo's,
   etc.
  
  I thought mutlilink PPP was something only available for ISDN?  If i'm
  incorrect, someone correct me.

 I have been looking at multilink ppp right now. (Trying to 
understand it really.)  There is an RFC on it that gives a broad 
description of it and directly states that it is not intended to be 
used on only one link service.  From the way it reads it should be 
able to handle one dial up analog modem and one ISDN (or more) at the 
same time.  My ISP has currently been moving to a new location and 
has been supporting a Fractional T1 frame relay line to handle one of 
his old modem banks.  A few days ago the router on the CSU/DSU died 
and the T1 bill came in at the same time.  For the heck of it he set 
up several modems on the modem server for multilink ppp and had one 
call the new office.  If several people call into the old modem bank 
one of the other modems dials up and starts sharing the load.  He let 
old Bell kill the T1 line and now only uses the dialup.  The response 
isn't too fast but it's miles cheaper than T1.  Once the modems are 
running together the second doesn't drop our right away so it works 
ok.  This message will actually go over that link.  If you would like 
to know what the RFC is I can find out, it's at work and I am 
extremely interested in it.  The modem server brand escapes me right 
now but I can find that out too.




 
 Nope, you're correct.  It was something new to me to, but after some
 well-received guidance, I've got things straightened out grin
  
  By the way, Kevin -- what docs have you found on eql?  Do you know if one
  has to use eql_enslave to enslave links, and if so, is the latest
  eql_enslave the one stored inside one of old eql patches on
  sunsite.unc.edu?
 
 About all I've found on EQL was in the NET3-Howto.  I haven't tried any of
 this yet (soon, though), but from the docs it looks as if all you need is
 to run ifconfig eql  up/down to establish the driver/interface.  (Of
 course, you need kernel support for EQL as well.)  Once that's done, there
 are additional steps required to establish connections to the remote
 system, but I can't remember those steps and I don't have access to the
 Howto right now.
 
 Also, I'm sure there are others _much_ more knowledgeable about EQL than I
 am - I'm a true newbie in this area.
 
 Thanks for the help,
 
 Kevin Traas
 Systems Analyst
 Edmondson Roper CA
 http://www.eroper.bc.ca
 
 
  
 
 
 --
 TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
 Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
 
 


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? 
e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


EQL

1997-04-22 Thread Steve Hsieh

Who has EQL running on their system?  To those that do -- do you still
have to run eql_enslave as written in the eql readme file in the kernel?
The info and web sites listed there are out of date.



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: EQL

1997-04-22 Thread Brian K Servis
Steve Hsieh writes:


Who has EQL running on their system?  To those that do -- do you still
have to run eql_enslave as written in the eql readme file in the kernel?
The info and web sites listed there are out of date.


The short answer: yes 

Brian 
-- 
Mechanical Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Purdue University   http://widget.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Again - Multilink PPP vs. EQL

1997-04-18 Thread Kevin Traas
I've no responses so far, so thought I'd repost.  

Please let me know if you've got any info for me.

Thx.
Kevin

 After burrowing around some, I finally found some info and docs on EQL;
 however, Multilink PPP is mentioned as a newer, and improved alternative.

 Unfortunately, I can't find any info on Multilink PPP in the HowTo's,
etc.
 
 Can anyone point me in the right direction?  Or, is it not yet available
on
 the Linux platform?
 
 TIA,
 
 Kevin Traas
 Systems Analyst
 Edmondson Roper CA
 http://www.eroper.bc.ca


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: Again - Multilink PPP vs. EQL

1997-04-18 Thread Steve Hsieh
  After burrowing around some, I finally found some info and docs on EQL;
  however, Multilink PPP is mentioned as a newer, and improved alternative.
 
  Unfortunately, I can't find any info on Multilink PPP in the HowTo's,
 etc.
  
  Can anyone point me in the right direction?  Or, is it not yet available
 on
  the Linux platform?


I thought mutlilink PPP was something only available for ISDN?  If i'm
incorrect, someone correct me.

By the way, Kevin -- what docs have you found on eql?  Do you know if one
has to use eql_enslave to enslave links, and if so, is the latest
eql_enslave the one stored inside one of old eql patches on
sunsite.unc.edu?



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Re: Again - Multilink PPP vs. EQL

1997-04-18 Thread Kevin Traas
   After burrowing around some, I finally found some info and docs on
EQL;
   however, Multilink PPP is mentioned as a newer, and improved
alternative.
  
   Unfortunately, I can't find any info on Multilink PPP in the HowTo's,
  etc.
 
 I thought mutlilink PPP was something only available for ISDN?  If i'm
 incorrect, someone correct me.

Nope, you're correct.  It was something new to me to, but after some
well-received guidance, I've got things straightened out grin
 
 By the way, Kevin -- what docs have you found on eql?  Do you know if one
 has to use eql_enslave to enslave links, and if so, is the latest
 eql_enslave the one stored inside one of old eql patches on
 sunsite.unc.edu?

About all I've found on EQL was in the NET3-Howto.  I haven't tried any of
this yet (soon, though), but from the docs it looks as if all you need is
to run ifconfig eql  up/down to establish the driver/interface.  (Of
course, you need kernel support for EQL as well.)  Once that's done, there
are additional steps required to establish connections to the remote
system, but I can't remember those steps and I don't have access to the
Howto right now.

Also, I'm sure there are others _much_ more knowledgeable about EQL than I
am - I'm a true newbie in this area.

Thanks for the help,

Kevin Traas
Systems Analyst
Edmondson Roper CA
http://www.eroper.bc.ca


 


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .


Multilink PPP vs. EQL

1997-04-17 Thread Kevin Traas

After burrowing around some, I finally found some info and docs on EQL;
however, Multilink PPP is mentioned as a newer, and improved alternative. 
However, I can't find any info on Multilink PPP in any of the HowTo's, etc.

Can anyone point me in the right direction?  Or, is it not yet available on
the Linux platform?

TIA,

Kevin Traas
Systems Analyst
Edmondson Roper CA
http://www.eroper.bc.ca


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .