Multiple gateways support

[J. Hellenthal]

Hmmm funny, seems the mailing list is now stripping my address and
moving posts to the top.

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:15:19PM +0200, K. Macy wrote:
> The weights of the links can be changed at run time. If one link is
> not passing traffic its weight should be set to zero until such time
> as it is passing traffic again.
> 
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Nikolay Denev <ndenev at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 2011, at 5:36 PM, Michael Proto wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:02 AM, J. Hellenthal <jhell at dataix.net> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 01:45:54PM +0400, Eir Nym wrote:
> >>>> On 1 April 2011 21:27, Baginski Darren <kickbsd at yandex.ru> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could please someone tell me about current state of multiple gw capabilities of FreeBSD?
> >>>>> I have dual homed FreeBSD box, one interface ISP1 another ISP2 :
> >>>>> 1) can I balance outgoing traffic across them ?
> >>>>> 2) Is there support of any kind dead gateway detection?
> >>>>> 3) Can I install multiple routes to the same network (with same and with different wight)? If yes how it behaves with one link failure, in particular if interface is down?
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> From what you said here it seems that your looking for lagg(4) with
> >>> configured with the loadbalance option. Give this man page [1] a
> >>> thorough read and youll probably see what your looking for.
> >>>
> >>> 1) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=lagg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> about multiply GWs: you can set multiply gw via setfib(1) utility and
> >>>> use fib in your firewall rules. But it is not very handy with DHCP and
> >>>> rc(8) (setfib is located in /usr/bin and can't be used in /etc/rc.d).
> >>>> Due to this I have to add another FreeBSD box to handle dynamic
> >>>> routes.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is the one thing I know which can I do in linux easily and in
> >>>> freebsd with hacks.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>  Regards,
> >>>
> >>>  J. Hellenthal
> >>>  JJH48-ARIN
> >>>  0x89D8547E
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't think lagg(4) will work here, as its designed for two
> >> interfaces that are attached to the same network (see the example in
> >> the man page). For two different ISPs, I think the setfib approach is
> >> probably the way to go.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Proto
> >>
> >
> > Actually I think the OP is asking about the "options RADIX_MPATH" feature.
> >
> > 1) Yes, It can balance over the two links but only using Modulo-N Hash (RFC2991) algorithm, and probably you should setup NAT on both links.
> > 2) AFAIK there is no dead gw detection code yet.
> > 3) Yes you can do that. There were some fixes for handling interfaces with no-link but I was not able to see it working in my setup. e.g. the host still tries to send traffic to a interface with no link, effectively blackholing the traffic (this was tested on a soekris box with if_vr(4))
> >
> > IMHO the whole RADIX_MPATH stuff is still in experimental stage and needs some more work to work correctly.
> >
> > There is a recent thread about some improvements in RADIX_MPATH.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Nikolay
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

-- 

  Regards,

  J. Hellenthal
  JJH48-ARIN
  0x89D8547E