netdev - Re: Routing over multiple interfaces

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1289401704.2860.182.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:08:24 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	uweber@...aro.com
Subject: Re: Routing over multiple interfaces

Le mercredi 10 novembre 2010 à 14:50 +0000, David Woodhouse a écrit :
> On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 22:35 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 
> > David W. probably wants to use teql or some bonding ?
> > 
> > # tc qdisc add dev ppp0 root teql0
> > # tc qdisc add dev ppp1 root teql0
> > # ip link set dev teql0 up
> > # ip route add default src 90.155.92.214 dev teql0
> 
> That works; thanks. Or it should do... there's a slight complication
> right now in that one of my lines is actually routed through a separate
> ADSL<->Ethernet box, because one of the ports on my Solos card is a bit
> shagged and syncs a lot slower than it should. So it's actually eth1 and
> ppp1 that I'm sharing. That should be fixed relatively soon as they're
> sending me a new box.
> 
> There's a minor issue with this setup though — ideally, any given TCP
> connection would tend to use the *same* interface as much as possible,
> and only 'overflow' onto the other interface if it's actually saturating
> the uplink on the first. That would tend to reduce the amount of packet
> re-ordering. At the moment it will split outbound packets over both
> lines even when they're relatively idle, introducing packet re-ordering
> where it wasn't really necessary.
> 
> That said, the world is supposed to cope with packet re-ordering, so I'm
> not going to lose a lot of sleep over it. And I have a feeling the
> downstream link from the ISP does it exactly the same.
> 

Its a bit problematic, as you said you want to use both links to do one
upload ;)

Maybe it is possible to instruct teql to try to not change links unless
one link is full...



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html