On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, John covici wrote:
> Hi. At the moment I have two high speed connections to the internet
> -- one somewhat faster than the other. I was looking at the advanced
> router howto and created the tables, etc as specified in section 4.2
> of that document and changed my default ro
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Paco Brufal wrote:
> Sorry if this question is very common, but I searched the
> maillist archive and didn't found an answer...
Did you read the HOWTO?
> I have a linux box with 3 interfaces, 2 of them have public IPs
> (eth1 and eth2), and the third is a private
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, nitin panjwani wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am running some tests in which I have to bring down
> my interface down as soon as I tear down the cable.
> Cable tearing results only in the link failure(as link
> light went off), but it doens't bring my interface
> down.
>
> Is there
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Christoph Simon wrote:
> Is there a way to list all existing routing tables, even those which
> are not referenced by a rule?
ip route show table all;
ip route show table cache
Doei, Arthur.
--
/\/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Work like you don't need the money
/
On 25 Oct 2002, Vincent Jaussaud wrote:
> However, I don't get why, in the same SSH session, TOS may differ from
> one packet to another. Using tcpdump, it seems that TOS value change
> right after the authentication has been successfully made.
Shit... you figured that one out *quite* a bit faste
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> Hello,
> On 25 Oct 2002, Vincent Jaussaud wrote:
> > But traffic is NAT-ed after multipath routing occurs !
> > Eg, the box which do multipath routing do not NAT traffic; traffic get
> > NAT-ed when leaving the gateways:
> >
> > LAN --> FW w/
On 25 Oct 2002, Vincent Jaussaud wrote:
> When only one gateway is used to reach remote networks, everything is
> working just fine. (Whatever gateway we choose to use)
> Whenever we attempt to activate multipath routing over both gateways,
> then SSH don't work anymore. We can ping, traceroute, t
On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Phil Doroff wrote:
> So, I figured since this list is the most likely to deal with people that
> push a lot of packets through Linux, and possible some via fiber I'd like to
> know if anyone has any recommendations on which NIC to buy to replace this
> thing.
I can heartily
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, raptor wrote:
> is there a way to LOG & -j OTHER-TARGET packet with one rule, or i have
> to use two ?
With iptables you have to use two. Or, you can just create a LOGDROP chain
that you then jump to, and have that chain contain the two rules.
Doei, Arthur.
--
/\/ |
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:
[snip, trying to do multipath routing through a NAT box]
> Trying to grok the interrelations between IPTABLES and routing has given
> me a headache. I guess I am not as sharp as I used to be. I am also
> having a hard time getting a complete handle
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:
> Mostly things work, and I have read the
> http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html#AEN261 pages and
> implemented them.
*blink*, nice to hear that. :)
> I appear to have full access to the extent that my iptables rules
> allo
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Laurens van Alphen wrote:
> Why don't you want to use NAT? NAT is not dirty. NAT is stable, fast,
> secure and saves you from renumbering your network when you switch
> providers.
On the other hand, NAT breaks useful stuff such as IPSec.
Doei, Arthur.
--
/\/ |
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, [iso-8859-1] John Bäckstrand wrote:
[snip]
> 2) I would _want_ to traffic shape based on mac, not
> IP, but this doesnt seem possible. It isnt vital for me
> though, ip will work.
Actually, it is possible, using netfilter and fwmarks.
Netfilter can actually match based on M
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
>
> >Unfortunately, in systems with identical cards that are configured using
> >plug-and-play methods such as those used by PCI random is the best shot you
> >have...
> >
> >
> &#x
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, John Telford wrote:
> I'm building routers. It's difficult to tell in advance which NIC will
> be assigned eth0 and which will assigned eth1 when using two NICs. Ping
> testing usually clears up this simple problem.
>
> The identification problem gets worse when adding a thi
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> On Friday 05 July 2002 21:05, Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> > > On Friday 05 July 2002 20:47, Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> > > >
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> On Friday 05 July 2002 20:47, Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was rereading the pages in the howto about multiple ISP's and I also
> > > found
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Stef Coene wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was rereading the pages in the howto about multiple ISP's and I also found
> some strange stuff in it. Maybe you can create a patch for Bert to update
> the howto ?
Could you be more precies? :)
Doei, Arthur. (Yeah, the type is intentional :))
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Laurens van Alphen wrote:
> What is still unclear to me is when the
> http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~julian/#routes patches are needed.
> What do they do exactly?
They add actual dead gateway detection (so that failover in fact does fail
over... ;)), alternative routes (s
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Ard van Breemen wrote:
> Hi,
> http://lartc.org/HOWTO//cvs/2.4routing/html/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html
> I am not sure who wrote this part or what it was based upon, but
> since I am working a lot longer now with ip rules, I think I want
> to add some stuff:
The stuff that
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
>
> >
> >On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Arthur,
[snip, RTT estimation from router]
> >>I hope i got you right, you mean i should calculate the difference
&g
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> i know this is not the right place to discuss this, but i assume some
> people here might have some good ideas which could help me.
> Also, i don't really know where else to turn ..
I'll see if I can help.
[snip]
> A TCP usually tak
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Ciprian Niculescu wrote:
> in LARTC at 4.2.1 Split access
>
> we have: ip route add $net dev $if src $ip
>
> i didn't understand what does the "src", if someone can explaint to me.
The 'src' specifies which source address to choose in case a packet matching
that routing rule
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Vikas B. Wadhwani wrote:
> This question adds on to the GRE tunnel query that I
> asked earlier.
>
> For the GRE tunnel to work, do I need to configure
> tunnels in both directions.
You need to configure the tunnel on both endpoints, as both
endpoints have to cooperate to pr
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Adrian Chung wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 10:25:24AM +0200, Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Adrian Chung wrote:
> >
> > > When you add a route that sets a src like:
> > >
> > > ip route add table
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Adrian Chung wrote:
> When you add a route that sets a src like:
>
> ip route add table 192.168.1.0/24 src 192.168.1.11 dev eth0
>
> The "src" doesn't specify the source IP to put in the packet (it's not
> network address translation, like SNAT in iptables), it just specifie
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Scottin wrote:
> & If can HOW ?
Yes. By writing your own tc32 matches. You can do QoS on any type of packet
that is queued.
Doei, Arthur.
--
/\/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Work like you don't need the money
/__\ / | A friend is someone with whom | Love like
id of that. But this list was the first place to dig, yes?
Yes, nowadays it is. :) At least you know there's something out there.
Oh, as I recall the patch is by some weird guy in Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Can't seem to find it using Google at the moment though.
The stuff on http://w
u'll have to do some digging on your own though...
Doei, Arthur. (Oh, and it is Arthur van Leeuwen. The surname is
'van Leeuwen'. Kinda like in 'Ludwig van Beethoven')
--
/\/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Work like you don't need the money
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Jason A. Pattie wrote:
> Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Martin Ferrari - Decidir IT wrote:
> >
> >Yes, Julian's patches do have an influence on multipath routing. They make
> >it quite a bit nicer to use in the case
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Martin Ferrari - Decidir IT wrote:
> > > The Alexey's patches has some influence on this?
> >
> > Err... good question. What do you mean with 'the Alexey's patches'?
> > You need a kernel newer than (say) 2.2.16, and then it'll just work.
> > The work was done by Alexey, yes,
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Martin Ferrari - Decidir IT wrote:
> > > I have a question that perhaps some of you have already
> > faced sometime.
> >
> > See http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2002q2/003111.html
> >
> > As you may note, this was written 7 days ago.
>
> Sorry, I'd suscribed months ago
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Michael Schwartzkopff wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have got the following problem: I want to connect my net to the internet
> using 2 (or more) DSL lines (PPPoE, dynamic IP addresses).
>
> So my question: Is it possible to connect the intern net via my firewall to
> the ISP using 2 DSL
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martin Ferrari - Decidir IT wrote:
> I have a question that perhaps some of you have already faced sometime.
See http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2002q2/003111.html
As you may note, this was written 7 days ago.
Doei, Arthur. (Busy trying to check out the LARTC CVS tre
On Mon, 1 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hey guys, can anyone comment on this if it is possible?
>
> My setup:
>
> Linux BoxCable
>_ E0_
>| |___|___|
>| |
>| |DSL
>| | E1_
>| |___|___|
>|___|
>
>
> Hopefu
35 matches
Mail list logo
