RE: Routing Problem
Thomas (and John too), Let me clarify a little bit. What I have is this: A single FreeBSD web server with a single NIC in it Two T1 routers, each with a different subnet. My FreeBSD box has two IP addresses assigned to it, one from the first subnet and one from the second subnet. I want to use round-robin DNS to direct half my web traffic to the first IP and half to the second IP. As I said to John in a private e-mail earlier this morning, I have a Windows 2000 box that is doing exactly this with these two subnets right now. I know it "can" be done. I have a feeling that the FreeBSD TCP stack lacks the capability. By the way, this also works with Cisco hardware. I have used Cisco equipment in this same configuration in the past. I think they way it SHOULD work is that you should be able to give a FreeBSD box multiple default gateways. When FreeBSD gets a packet to an IP on the first subnet, it should use the default gateway that is also on that subnet. When FreeBSD gets a packet to an IP on the second subnet, it should use the second default gateway. This seems to be the logic that Windows (and Cisco) uses. Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies (516) 908-4185 Fax http://www.meitech.com/ -Original Message- From: Thomas Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 7:57 AM To: Gustafson, Tim Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Routing Problem Hi Tim.. If you have multiple interfaces and you configure a default gateway for each interface, the default metric determination that is based on the speed of the interface usually uses the fastest interface for default gateway traffic. This is usually desirable in configurations in which the computer is connected to the same network. This behavior can become a problem when the computer exists on two or more disjointed networks (networks that do not provide symmetric reachability on layer3). Symmetric reachability exists when packets can be sent to and received from an arbitrary destination. Because the TCP/IP version4 protocol uses a single default route in FreeBSD's routing table at any one time for default route traffic, default routers configured on multiple interfaces connected to two or more disjointed networks can wreak routing traffic havoc. In FreeBSD, you can manually configure the routing table for the individual interfaces.. but it sounds to me as if you are attempting to use two ethernet interfaces connected to two disjointed networks connected to routers with two seperate subnets in order to balance http requests to one server.. is this the case? I guess I am not fully understanding your configuration ... T. - Original Message - From: "Gustafson, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thomas Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:06 AM Subject: RE: Routing Problem > Thomas, > > No, I'm not using this box as a router. It is a web server, and I need > to spread the load of my web traffic across two separate T1s. > > I can't just add routes. You need a default route, or parts of the > internet would become inaccessible. In my case, you need TWO default > routes. I have set up Cisco equipment and Windows workstations with two > default routes in the past, and it has worked. In fact, I have one > Windows box right now that is configured on both these networks with two > default gateways, and it is working. > > There has to be a way to make it work on FreeBSD. > > Tim Gustafson > MEI Technology Consulting, Inc > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (516) 379-0001 Office > (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies > (516) 908-4185 Fax > http://www.meitech.com/ > > > > -----Original Message- > From: Thomas Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:48 AM > To: Gustafson, Tim > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Routing Problem > > > Im confused.. if you have two T1s, then are using /30s dor the ranges? > If > so.. what about not giving a default gateway for either one and just add > > routes... > > Are you attempting utilize this as just a router.? > > Theres a section that covers setting up routing on interfaces in the > handbook: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-routin > g.html > > Hope this helps > > T > - Original Message - > From: "Gustafson, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 5:35 PM > Subject: Routing Problem > > >>I am having a problem setting up a multi-homed host. I have two >> separate T1 internet connections, and one physical NIC in my FreeBSD >> box. The two networks are as follows: >>
RE: Routing Problem
Thomas, No, I'm not using this box as a router. It is a web server, and I need to spread the load of my web traffic across two separate T1s. I can't just add routes. You need a default route, or parts of the internet would become inaccessible. In my case, you need TWO default routes. I have set up Cisco equipment and Windows workstations with two default routes in the past, and it has worked. In fact, I have one Windows box right now that is configured on both these networks with two default gateways, and it is working. There has to be a way to make it work on FreeBSD. Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies (516) 908-4185 Fax http://www.meitech.com/ -Original Message- From: Thomas Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:48 AM To: Gustafson, Tim Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Routing Problem Im confused.. if you have two T1s, then are using /30s dor the ranges? If so.. what about not giving a default gateway for either one and just add routes... Are you attempting utilize this as just a router.? Theres a section that covers setting up routing on interfaces in the handbook: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-routin g.html Hope this helps T - Original Message - From: "Gustafson, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 5:35 PM Subject: Routing Problem >I am having a problem setting up a multi-homed host. I have two > separate T1 internet connections, and one physical NIC in my FreeBSD > box. The two networks are as follows: > > Connection 1: > LAN Address: 1.2.3.24/25 > Router Address: 1.2.3.1 > > Connection 2: > LAN Address: 4.5.6.106/29 > Router Address: 4.5.6.105 > > I would like to set up my FreeBSD box so that I can connect to either > LAN address from the outside world. The problem is that I cannot > specify two default gateways. Right now, I have 1.2.3.1 set up as a > default gateway, and I can get to the 1.2.3.24 IP from the outside > world. However, I can't get to 4.5.6.106. I can't even ping it. From > the FreeBSD box, I can ping 4.5.6.105, and from the outside world I can > ping 4.5.6.105, but I can't ping 4.5.6.106 from the outside world. > > Is there any way to make this work? How can I make FreeBSD have two > default gateways? I read somewhere about being able to set up source > routing, but I haven't been able to find any HOWTO's about that. > > Any help is greatly appreciated. > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Routing Problem
I am having a problem setting up a multi-homed host. I have two separate T1 internet connections, and one physical NIC in my FreeBSD box. The two networks are as follows: Connection 1: LAN Address: 1.2.3.24/25 Router Address: 1.2.3.1 Connection 2: LAN Address: 4.5.6.106/29 Router Address: 4.5.6.105 I would like to set up my FreeBSD box so that I can connect to either LAN address from the outside world. The problem is that I cannot specify two default gateways. Right now, I have 1.2.3.1 set up as a default gateway, and I can get to the 1.2.3.24 IP from the outside world. However, I can't get to 4.5.6.106. I can't even ping it. From the FreeBSD box, I can ping 4.5.6.105, and from the outside world I can ping 4.5.6.105, but I can't ping 4.5.6.106 from the outside world. Is there any way to make this work? How can I make FreeBSD have two default gateways? I read somewhere about being able to set up source routing, but I haven't been able to find any HOWTO's about that. Any help is greatly appreciated. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Threaded Perl on 4.10-RELEASE
Hello! Is there any way to turn on threaded Perl in the base system, instead of using the Perl port? I need to use p5-Sendmail-Milter which requires threads, but I would rather not install the Perl port over the base Perl installation. Is there any flag I can set in /etc/make.conf that will configure the base system to install a threaded Perl instead of a non-threaded one? Thanks in advance! Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies (516) 908-4185 Fax http://www.meitech.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
RE: vi / EAGAIN Problem
Sergey, I have submitted the problem to FreeBSD using the send-pr program, as Jonathan Chen asked me to. I will follow up here with some details for you though. Once the problem starts happening, it seems that I have to log off the system and log back in again to fix it. This usually (95% of the time) fixes the problem. It also only happens when I press a key - if I let vi sit there with a file loaded into it, it will not get the error no matter how long I wait. The problem only happens when I press a key, and not always the first one. I can usually work in vi for 10-15 seconds before the error comes up. Anyhow, I have submitted the bug report and the link to my ktrace is still up, so if anyone has any ideas about what could be causing this, I would love to hear from you. For now, my work-around is to just log off and back in again when it happens, but as you can imagine, that gets annoying in a big hurry. Tim Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies http://www.meitech.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
vi / EAGAIN Problem
Hello everyone. I finally have the output of a ktrace of the problem where vi returns "Error: input: Resource temporarily unavailable" to me. It can be downloaded from the following link. Any information that can tell me what's going on here and maybe what I can do to fix it would be greatly appreciated. http://www.meitech.com/fbsd/ktrace.out Thanks a billion! Tim Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies http://www.meitech.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Error: input: Resource temporarily unavailable
I am getting the following error in "vi" pretty consistently: Error: input: Resource temporarily unavailable Usually I get this at every attempt I make to run vi. Every now and then I'll somehow manage to stay in vi however long I want. It seems that if it's going to bomb, it bombs in the first 30 seconds of running the program. Otherwise, it doesn't happen at all. No other programs do this, as far as I know. I have tried installing the nvi-devel port to see if maybe this is fixed in a new version, but it does the exact same thing. I even rebuilt the kernel and world after a cvsup to make sure something wasn't broken, but that didn't work wither. I have tried switching shells from bash to just sh to see if it's related somehow to bash, but that did not have any effect either. I am currently running FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE-p8 i386 This problem pops up about once a month and then seems to go away by itself after a few days, but I would really like to know what is causing it. I have searched the FreeBSD mailing list archives and found a few references to changing some flag in my shell, and I followed their instructions, but it did not help. Obviously, it is a real pain in the neck since I use vi exclusively and I despise having to us pico for anything. If anyone has any idea how I can fix this, I would really appreciate it. Tim Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies http://www.meitech.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
FreeBSD 4.9 / Supermicro 7043P-8R / Crashes After 2-5 Minutes Of Uptime
Hello I have a brand spanking new Supermicro 7043P-8R server with dual Intel 3.2gHZ Xeon processors and 4GB of Kingston memory. I installed FreeBSD 4.9 on the box and it gives me the following message on the screen about 2-5 minutes after it finished booting: boot() called on CPU#0 I get this message no matter whether I leave the console alone or if I log in and try to work on the machine. I read a thread about a problem very similar to this from November of 2003, but the thread seems to have just died without any resolution. Is this a known issue with Supermicro Motherboards? Does anyone have any suggestions as to a potential patch or other fix? I'm going to start doing the hardware swapping thing in a bit and see if that fixes anything, but I'd really like to hear back from anyone who has any experience with this issue. Thanks a million! Tim Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies http://www.meitech.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
