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
