Solved everything!
Was my mistake....
Tahnks people!
Tamer
Moe Trin schrieb:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
> article <4b0854e6$0$6578$(E-Mail Removed)>, Tamer Higazi
> wrote:
>
>> eth0 -> 192.168.0.100 GW 192.168.0.1
>> eth1 -> 192.168.0.101
>
> Are you using policy routing? Don't think so. So what do you hope
> to have happen with this configuration? Basic networking assumes
> there is ONE route to a destination locally. If there are more than
> one, the kernel takes the narrower one (Genmask), but if they are
> _equal_ it assumes you fscked up and make a mistake - and uses
> the LAST defined route (because it assumes you forgot to remove the
> first or wrong route).
>
>> tamer # route -n:
>>
>> Kernel IP routing table
>> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
>> 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
>> 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
>
> So - two roads lead to the local network. Which one should I use?
>
>> 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
>> 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth1
>
> Different problem here. Two roads lead to everywhere else... which one
> should I use? Ahh, one road has a higher cost (Metric) so we _won't_
> take that road. Before you say "take the higher cost road when there
> is an accident blocking the lower cost road", the rule says to use the
> lower cost road. If you want the other road to be used in the event of
> an accident, you need to have the police (a routing daemon like routed
> or gated) change the cost (Metric) of the lower cost road - that's the
> only way we're going to use the eth1 route.
>
> If you really must use two interfaces, you need to be using a policy
> routing daemon, which is more complicated to set up.
>
> [compton ~]$ whatis ip tc
> ip (8) - show / manipulate routing, devices, policy routing and tunnels
> tc (8) - show / manipulate traffic control settings
> [compton ~]$
>
> Old guy
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
