Re: ip route weight stupid question

On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 05:34:50AM +0200, NN_il_Confusionario wrote: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 11:59:10PM +0300, Stuart Gall wrote: > > Does a higher weight mean that the route will be used more or used less ? > [snip] > > Furthermore, if you really want to do this, you probably also want to look

Re: ip route weight stupid question

On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 11:59:10PM +0300, Stuart Gall wrote: > Does a higher weight mean that the route will be used more or used less ? Citation from Linkname: Re: Loadbalancing the gat: msg#00055 URL: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:1Q2CWWmtUJAJ:osdir.com/ml/linux.network.routin

Re: ip route weight stupid question

On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 11:59:10PM +0300, Stuart Gall wrote: > Hello, > SO I have scoured the internet, the man pages, groups. I just cant find > a definitive answer. > > > weight NUMBER - is a weight for this element of a multi- > path route reflecting its relative bandwidth or quality. >

ip route weight stupid question

Hello, SO I have scoured the internet, the man pages, groups. I just cant find a definitive answer. weight NUMBER - is a weight for this element of a multi- path route reflecting its relative bandwidth or quality. So more weight = better quality = preferred e.g. ip route add defau