On 06/25/2018 12:50 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
Hello,
Hi Julian,
Yes, ARP state for unreachable GWs may be updated slowly, there is
in-time feedback only for reachable state.
Fair.
Most of the installations where I needed D.G.D. to work would be okay
with a < 5 minute timeout. Obviously
Hello,
On Sun, 24 Jun 2018, Erik Auerswald wrote:
> Hello Julien,
>
> > http://ja.ssi.bg/dgd-usage.txt
>
> Thanks for that info!
>
> Can you tell us what parts from the above text is actually implemented
> in the upstream Linux kernel, and starting with which version(s)
> (approximat
Hello,
On Thu, 21 Jun 2018, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 06/21/2018 01:57 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> > http://ja.ssi.bg/dgd-usage.txt
>
> "DGD" or "Dead Gateway Detection" sounds very familiar. I referenced it in an
> earlier reply.
>
> I distinctly remember DGD not beha
Hello Julien,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:57:14PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Grant Taylor wrote:
> > On 06/20/2018 01:00 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > > You can also try alternative routes.
> >
> > "Alternative routes"? I can't say as I've heard that description as a
On 06/21/2018 01:57 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
Hello,
Hi.
I think so
Okay.
I'll do some more digging.
You can search on net. I have some old docs on these issues, they should
be actual:
http://ja.ssi.bg/dgd-usage.txt
"DGD" or "Dead Gateway Detection" sounds very familiar. I referen
Hello,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 06/20/2018 01:00 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > You can also try alternative routes.
>
> "Alternative routes"? I can't say as I've heard that description as a
> specific technique / feature / capability before.
>
> Is that it's of
On 06/20/2018 01:00 PM, Julian Anastasov wrote:
You can also try alternative routes.
"Alternative routes"? I can't say as I've heard that description as a
specific technique / feature / capability before.
Is that it's official name?
Where can I find out more about it?
But as the kernel su
Hello,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Akshat Kakkar wrote:
> Hi netdev community,
>
> I have 2 interfaces
> eno1 : 192.168.1.10/24
> eno2 : 192.168.2.10/24
>
> I added routes as
> 172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.1.254 metric 1
> 172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.2.254 metric 2
>
> My intention : All traffic
On 06/20/2018 09:18 AM, Grant Taylor wrote:
Where can I find more information on ignore_routes_with_linkdown? I
don't see it listed in $Kernel/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt.
(I do see fib_multipath_use_neigh documented there in.)
I'm specifically interested in if ignore_routes_with_l
On 06/20/2018 07:48 AM, David Ahern wrote:
See the ignore_routes_with_linkdown and fib_multipath_use_neigh sysctl
settings.
Where can I find more information on ignore_routes_with_linkdown? I
don't see it listed in $Kernel/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt.
(I do see fib_multipath_use_n
On 6/20/18 2:26 AM, Akshat Kakkar wrote:
> Hi netdev community,
>
> I have 2 interfaces
> eno1 : 192.168.1.10/24
> eno2 : 192.168.2.10/24
>
> I added routes as
> 172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.1.254 metric 1
> 172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.2.254 metric 2
>
> My intention : All traffic to 172.16.0.0/12 sh
Hi netdev community,
I have 2 interfaces
eno1 : 192.168.1.10/24
eno2 : 192.168.2.10/24
I added routes as
172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.1.254 metric 1
172.16.0.0/12 via 192.168.2.254 metric 2
My intention : All traffic to 172.16.0.0/12 should go thru eno1. If
192.168.1.254 is not reachable (no arp en
12 matches
Mail list logo
