Message-
From: Raj Mathur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:49 PM
To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
Subject: RE: [LARTC] Problem with Load Balancing
William == William T Mullaney William writes:
William To my knowledge, there is no way to download one file
William from
Title: RE: [LARTC] Problem with Load Balancing
Well, if you had a download manager and the system at the other side allowed you to start your transfers in the middle of the file (which isn't out of the question) that could potentially work. The problem is that as far as I see, there's
William == William T Mullaney William writes:
William To my knowledge, there is no way to download one file
William from two different connections connected to two different
William ISPs at the same time. If you are running BGP then you
William might be able to load balance
We have also set up a somewhat similar method of load balancing. Our
traffic is never a 50-50 split (well 3:2 is how we have it set, but it
doesn't always get close to that), but as the load picks up, it tends to be
closer to the actual amount.
Well, then there is not much to do about this.
Title: RE: [LARTC] Problem with Load Balancing
Vlad,
We have also set up a somewhat similar method of load balancing. Our traffic is never a 50-50 split (well 3:2 is how we have it set, but it doesn't always get close to that), but as the load picks up, it tends to be closer
Hello,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, hare ram wrote:
iam using redhat 8.0 with Latest Kernel
2.4.18-18.0
with iproute
[root@pdn root]# rpm -q iproute
iproute-2.4.7-5
I'm not sure if 2.4.7-5 covers the desired version but here it is:
PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Problem With Load Balancing the Links
Hello,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, hare ram wrote:
iam using redhat 8.0 with Latest Kernel
2.4.18-18.0
with iproute
[root@pdn root]# rpm -q iproute
iproute-2.4.7-5
Hello,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, hare ram wrote:
as you have mentioned in the documents, the last time should be default, but
why iam getting 253 here
Table default (253) is always there but we don't use it
because we want table main before 201 and 202.
0: from all lookup
Hello,
On Sun, 22 Dec 2002, hare ram wrote:
iam following the Julian Nano.txt, iam able to setup all
but when i check the following command
[root@pdn root]# ip route list table 222
default proto static
nexthop via 202.x.x.254 dev eth0 weight 256 dead onlink pervasive
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 10:12 PM
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Problem With Load Balancing the Links
Hello,
On Sun, 22 Dec 2002, hare ram wrote:
iam following the Julian Nano.txt, iam able to setup all
but when i check the following command
[root
10 matches
Mail list logo
