I've configuration like this :
Quote:
I try to configure my /etc/rc.local with these setting :
Quote:
But whenever i check my router after reboot, still i can't connect to inet.
I'm trying to do a implementation of load-balance with fail-over system using (ip route2 + netfilter), anyway after spent many time on it, I can't do it on my own, I think I'm so close about the solution anyway after check each line 30 times I'm really lost on IT.
View 4 Replies View RelatedMy problem is that I would like to load balance or aggregate 2 separate Internet connections on my laptop. Currently a hard line ISP is not available so I'm using an Sierra Wireless 885 USB air card. Thing is the card is quite slow. I also can tether an iPhone to the laptop. The ideal solution would be to have both connections being utilized to help speed up the overall experience, even if it is only a modest gain in speed.
as I do not know much about iptables and basic TCP/IP routing, I'm finding it difficult to implement those solutions. If someone can point me in the right direction ( a slightly dumb down how:to? or better explained? )
BTW, both phone and aircard get dynamic IP's. Running Ubuntu 10.4
I came across this while trying to find a solution for my load-balancing clustering issue in another thread. Since I perceive this as something on its own, I decided to post a new thread. I came across this site to setup a two-server cluster using Conga - Luci and Ricci.
From my understanding, this is what was done:-
1. Both servers have luci running using a shared storage via GFS to provide a failover
2. Both (and same) servers have ricci agent running for the clustering
I'm aware that Conga clustering aim to achieve High-Availability.
1. Can it also achieve Load-Balancing?
2. If yes, would the guide from the link above be sufficient or would they be additional setup/pre-req to be done? Since I'm new to this area and there was no mention of load-balancing, I'm still wondering if this is what I need to incorporate.
I have two machines fairly decent which I wish to cluster and run a vm (preferred choice virtualbox) on it, if possible with load balance.
View 1 Replies View RelatedWe have a server that needs to be hi availablility.
The problem is, sometimes our internet winks out for a few minutes.
We decided that we wanted to get two seperate lines to our server, and so they would be two different ip addresses.
What out there would allow us to serve apache on www.mywebsite.com on more than one ip, and, if we can, do load balancing?
I have two Red Hat entreprise Linux 5 servers running the same applications, my goal is to load balance the incoming traffic between these two servers without adding an additional hardware as load balancer, the incoming traffic is basically Web traffic and on the servers, Apache and PHP are running. Red Hat solutions that I found are:
1- LVS
2- Piranha
3- Red Hat cluster suite.
Can LVS run on one of the real servers (or both servers, for redundancy issues) and load balance the traffic between its server and the other one? If yes, will LVS has a big impact on the CPU/memory usage? How can I estimate this usage if I know how much traffic is coming and the HW specs?
Can I install Red Hat cluster suite on these two servers, and configure it in a way that the virtual IP is on different server for different request (taking in consideration that the same session will be always served by the same server)?Finally, is there any other/better solution that can fit my requirements to load balance the traffic without additional hardware?
I used both pound and nginx as load balancers. With pound I had issues with SSL websites so I moved to nginx. With nginx I have the problem that it does not load balance equally between the backend servers.
I remember hearing something about another load balancing web server but I forgot its name.
Does anyone know other alternatives to nginx/pound?
What is the current state of NFS failover (i.e. setting up two server with shared storage, with automatic failover if one fails?) I've seen a cookbook, but no details that would let me assess how well it works. There are lots of complex issues with data consistency, but the detailed information on that is years old. Our needs are fairly simple: 2 servers, a shared array, and I'm reasonably sure that we don't use locking. However we'd like failover to work reliably without loss of data.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI seem to be having a strange problem configuring Piranha to load balance (Direct route) 2 ports across 2 w2k3 servers in a test environment. What is strange is that 1 of the ports are working fine but the other port doesn't work. I've read many how-to and after many frustrating hours I disabled the firewall, iptables and arptables services and one of the ports are load balanced across the 2 real servers. Here's the environment.
[Code]....
I can telnet from the client to the realserves on both ports and it's works. When I telnet to the VIP only one port gets through and the other gives me "could not open connection to host port 32777 : connect failed. The configuration in Piranha for one port is the same as the other. I can't help but think that some other configuration for port 32777 was missed.
I dual boot XP and FC14 and have 2 routers. I can connect and ping one of these routers when I'm in FC and I have an IP address I just can't load any websites. When I connect to the other router (my main router) it works fine. When I boot into XP and connect to the problem router I can load pages fine. It's only when I'm on FC14 and connect to the problem router that I can't load pages even though I have an IP and can ping around.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a firewall ( a pc with debian 5) with 2 internet connections. each connected to a ethernet card (the firewall has 2 ethernet pci cards so it has one connection per card)how can i balance the internet requests from my LAN using this 2 connections?
View 3 Replies View RelatedMy friend has a server with 2 ips, 1 primary and 1 secondary/failover. He has given me a shell account and I want to use ssh to route my home http traffic through it like a socks proxy. I connect to his server using the secondary ip like this:
ssh me@secondary_ip -p port -D forwarding_port
It builds a proxy, however it uses the primary ip of the server, not the secondary ip that I logged in with. When using irssi I've bound it to the secondary ip with no problem. If I try to use the -b flag I get the error: cannot bind: Cannot assign requested address.
how I can bind the ssh tunnel to the secondary ip?
I'm in need of some advise from you guys. I'm currently running a live production serverA, and last week it went down for a couple of hours which was really bad to say the least.
I've been thinking about building a mirror serverB that will rsync my data nightly. Now I don't want to load balance here, I just need to be able to switch to serverB when serverA goes down for any reason.
Would the best solution for this is to change my main nameserver entry when I want to switch ? I'm just curious if it will be a few hours or an instant change.
I thought I'd ask before attempting this live.
I have a dual-homed Debian server running squid, but not acting as a router. Simplied network diagram is below - there are other local hops between the gateways and the Internet.
Code:
(eth0 @ 192.168.44.2) <--> (Gateway1 @ 192.168.44.1) <--> Internet
(eth1 @ 192.168.55.2) <--> (Gateway2 @ 192.168.55.1) <--> Internet
Using Gateway1 gives a very fast, but not always reliable route to the Internet. Using Gateway2 gives a slower, but more reliable route to the Internet. The server uses Gateway1 as the default gateway.
I have written a script that pings three hosts on the Internet, and if all three are down, switches the default gateway to Gateway2. This part seems to be easy, but I'd like know if there is a way of routing a ICMP/ping out eth0 to a host, with all other traffic to the host going out eth1, so I can determine if the Internet is reachable via Gateway1 again.
We use a linux box for routing and traffic shaping (we have a few thousand ip addresses routed through this box) and the soft interrupt load is very high.We use linux kernel 2.6.32.7 on an Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz.Cpu1 serves an internal network interface, and Cpu3 serves a single physical network interface (with 2 vlans):
Cpu0 : 0.4%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 98.2%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 1.4%si, 0.0%st
Cpu1 : 0.7%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 16.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.3%hi, 82.9%si, 0.0%st
Cpu2 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 96.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 3.9%si, 0.0%st
[code]...
We run redundant switches that two nic's on each server connect to. We also run bonding on our servers. Because we have two switches, we can't run lacp or anything. If a switch goes into a crashed state where it doesn't pass traffic but still provides link, bonding thinks the interface is still up and thus will still send traffic through it. Does anybody know a better way to configure the fail over of the interface? This would be a similar situation to somebody using a media converter.
View 1 Replies View RelatedBecause of the configuration of my house, I need two routers.I have a DLink ADSL router as my main router and the Belkin N1 as my repeater.I have set up the IP address in the Belkin to be 10.1.1.10 - my DLink is 10.1.1.1. I have disable the dhcp in the Belkin and set the DNS as ISP provided. [URL]..I have set the channel to 11 and in the Ubuntu Network Manger I have set the IPV4 to Link Local Only. I can see the Belkin and connect with my PC.but it will not take me through to the internet.
View 9 Replies View RelatedI want to set up a Linux box as a wireless router to replace our existing Netgear WNR1000 router, as I believe the Netgear does not support the coming IPv6 protocol. Unfortunately, it is not flashable with OpenWRT or DD-WRT presently.
As we have Comcast, our cable modem acts as a dumb modem according to the customer support guy I talked to, and our router is the one that asks for the IP address from DHCP. Thus, when Comcast switches over to IPv6, I don't believe my existing router would work, correct?
My idea is to take a Linux box and put two NICs and a wireless adapter in it, using IPCop or Smoothwall to set up a router. I could then enable IPv6 support for when we have IPv6 with Comcast. Is that possible? Would there be a way to get BIND to hand out private IP addresses in the same subnet on the both the LAN NIC and the wireless card?
I have a desktop PC running Ubuntu 9.10 and Windows 7, and a Eee PC 701 laptop running EasyPeasy Ubuntu 9.04. I'd like to connect the desktop to the laptop with a wired connection (eth0), then the laptop to my ADSL router using wireless (ath0).
I have a crossover ethernet cable (I bought on ebay). I have set up my laptop with a static IP address on my LAN and it uses OpenDNS.
I have added this to /etc/sysctl.conf on the laptop:
net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
Then I tried this on the laptop:
sudo iptables --table nat --append POSTROUTING --out-interface ath0 -j MASQUERADE
sudo iptables --append FORWARD --in-interface eth0 -j ACCEPT
This is a variation on what I found on other sites describing how to set up a router. I don't understand iptables very well, but I gather that the above two lines should set up forwarding so that traffic from my router to the laptop will be forwarded to the desktop, and vice versa.
But this doesn't work. The connection doesn't even establish between the laptop and the desktop.
I'm having trouble getting my network set up the way that I want it/had it. You see, when I first set up my network, I just had my cable modem going directly to my standard wired router (A D-Link DI-604), which had DHCP,and was connected to all of the computers on my network. I had one switch hooked up to one of the ports of the router, but this was a regular switch, and it would not try to assign IP addresses, it would just pass through the DHCP info as I wanted.
Now however, my network setup has changed. My room mate and I both got laptops, and we decided that we wanted to have wireless access so we didn't have to constantly plug in to the router.
Now my network is set up like this: The modem is hooked up to the router(DI-604), which is hooked up on the LAN side to our computers, our switch (which is hooked up to 3 more computers), and to a wireless router card (A Gigabyte GN-BC01).
The wireless router card has two jacks for ethernet. One for WAN, and one for LAN. The LAN side we have plugged only into the computer in which the card is installed.
Now the problem is this: The wireless router card comes with DHCP by default, and it's assigning addresses to the laptops and to the computer hat it's in, and worse, the IP addresses are on a different subnet than that of the main dlink router. The Main (dlink) router assigns addresses from 192.168.0.1 (itself) to 192.168.0.254, while the wireless router card assigns addresses from 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.1.254 (itself).
Because of this, I cannot access services on the wireless network from my wired network or vice versa. The first thing I tried was setting the card to assign addresses from 192.168.0.12 to 192.168.0.253, however it just said "internal error" when I tried to do this. I decided that this may be because it sees that it was being assigned an address on it's WAN side on the same subnet. So the next thing I tried was disabling DHCP and setting the "LAN IP Address" to 192.168.0.12, hoping that the DHCP would just go through the card, like a switch. I would have set the LAN IP address to be assigned by DHCP, but this was not an option, so I decided that'd be the best thing to set it to.
Once again however, setting the LAN ip address to an address on the same subnet as that of the IP assigned to it's WAN side caused it to report an "internal error". I verified that this was the issue by setting the LAN address to several other private IP addresses to test (I.E. 10.0.0.1, 192.168.3.1, 192.168.5.12).
My question then really is: How do I set up both routers so that I can access services and computers from each network from the other network. Should I set them with different subnets and set the gateway on the wireless network to the main router? To the wireless router card? Should I put them on the same subnet? Will it know how to communicate?
Here is a link to (picture) my network diagram. Network Diagram
I am familiar with windows 2008 cluster servers, and I just started testing with centos cluster. I am creating a simple 2-node cluster, for a simple ping test.
Node 1: 10.0.0.1
Node 2: 10.0.0.1
Virtual ip: 10.0.0.10
So far, I can ping a virtual ip, and manually relocate it between the nodes, but I didn't figure out, how to do this automatically. So this is my question: How can I setup the cluster, to it automatically failover the a service to another node case one node fails?
These r IP provided by my ISP that i've put on Fedora 8:
WAN IP:xxx.xxx.xxx.17 (eth0)
Subnet:255.255.255.252
Gateway:xxx.xxx.xxx.18
Valid static(public) IP set of 2:
IP:xxx.xxx.xxx.147 & 148 (eth1, eth2)
Subnet:255.255.255.240
i want to run xxx.xxx.xxx.147 as a web server & xxx.xxx.xxx.148 as a ftp server. but I'm able to ping only xxx.xxx.xxx.17(WAN IP) from outside world. Can any1 tell me that how can i bring my 147 & 148 IP online without router.
I've moved a linuxbox from being my gateway (nat, etc) to behind a new gateway (a DD-wrt router). For transparency purposes, I'd like to continue using the old box services, and just have the gateway in front of it.
Here's what I did:
The newgateway is setup for class C, 192.168.0.0
This configuration works, but sometimes it doesn't and I haven't figured out why yet.
At sometimes, clients on the LAN get throughput rates with very little speed loss (using speakeasy speed test). They will run at 33M on the LAN, running through both the newgateway, and the oldbox, and get about 35M with directly connected to the cable modem.
Other times, it seems nothing can talk with anyone, and I am not sure why.
I know what I have done is a little unconventional, but it's a transitional thing, and I am not sure it is the cause of the problem, although it was the last things changed.
I have bought Vodafone Internet USB Stick (model is ZTE K3570-z). I have unlocked my device so I can use any company's SIM card to surf internet.
Currently I am using Uninor to surf internet on the stick. On Windows, I am using Windows based dialer software which has feature to check balance by *222*2# number. I get my balance in Rupees and also my Internet balance in MB so I can plan my usage same as we get on mobile.
But at most of time I am using Ubuntu Linux version 11.04. I have configured my USB Stick to work under Ubuntu Linux but I don't know how to check balance by *222*2# number?
My son lost his USB Wireless stick for his Computer. I had thought I heard that if you had a second wireless router, you could use it somehow to detect the wireless router you have already set up in your home (like using a wireless card)? Is this what Ad-Hoc is? Either way, can this be done and if so how? I use a WRT54Gx2 Lynksys router and have a TRENDNET TEW-432BRP wireless router and also a spare D-link DI-514. I use ubuntu 10.04, and also wanted to know if I connected one of the router to his on the LAn port could he connect msaybe through an Ad-Hoc on my local computer here? He uses XP on his. I'm a newbie to linux and networking in general.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI'm looking for a way to change the balance of my audio in the terminal. (i.e. setting a different volume for the left and the right speaker).I can set the volume level for both channels at once with a command like:
Code:
pacmd set-sink-volume 1 32768
But I'd like to do something like
Code:
pacmd set-balance 1 -0.2
to shift the balance towards the left speaker.
I want to configure linux CentOS 5 as a router using iptable, .Im new in linux so I need the steps to do that
View 5 Replies View RelatedI moved my server and network equipment, and now the wireless works but I cannot get my server online. I host a website, so this is kind of urgent.
I have a wireless router and can access the internet fine on my laptop. My server is wired & connected to the router. It sets up the networking properly.. ifconfig has an ip address, the default gateway is present. But I cannot ping google, or even the router. It says destination host unreachable.
So I go back to the laptop to check the router settings.. sometimes it likes to assign the server the wrong internal ip. But, I can't access the router settings either! The page (192.168.1.1) times out. Same with trying to ping the router. How can the laptop be online if it can't reach the router?
Oddly, ifconfig on my laptop reports an ip address starting with 99.233. It's always given me an internal address starting with 192.168. What's going on here? Is the router not allocating an internal ip? I use wicd to connect, if it's relevant.
We have a windows laptop that can only get a "local connection". Now it does sound like the router is forwarding directly to my laptop, instead of allocating internal ips.
I am familiar with active to active cluster failover and active to pasive failover, but what is network failover?
View 1 Replies View Related
