LARTC
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [LARTC] Load balancing using connmark

Subject: Re: [LARTC] Load balancing using connmark
From: Peter Rabbitson <rabbit@rabbit.us>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 12:59:58 +0200
Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: lartc-list@securepoint.com
Delivered-to: lartc@outpost.ds9a.nl
In-reply-to: <4642F92E.50001@rabbit.us>
List-archive: <http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc>
List-help: <mailto:lartc-request@mailman.ds9a.nl?subject=help>
List-id: "Mailinglist of the Linux Advanced Routing &amp; Traffic Control project" <lartc.mailman.ds9a.nl>
List-post: <mailto:lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc>, <mailto:lartc-request@mailman.ds9a.nl?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc>, <mailto:lartc-request@mailman.ds9a.nl?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <000401c792ca$9ba1cdb0$5964a8c0@SalimSi> <4642F92E.50001@rabbit.us>
Sender: lartc-bounces@mailman.ds9a.nl
User-agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070329)
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
> ...
> In the case of _local_ traffic - it becomes even trickier. The problem
> is that when sockets are created they already have a source IP (the
> kernel determines that by looking at the default routing table, your
> marks do not exist yet). 

This is misleading - it will happen only when the application does not
request a specific ip/interface to bind to. Only then the kernel default
table is consulted, and the best interface is determined based on the
destination that is supplied on socket creation.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>