Thanks. Digging into it, I read that as of kernel 4.4, load balancing is done per-flow based on a hash over the source and destination addresses: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=07355737a8badd951e6b72aa8609a2d6eed0a7e7
And: "Multipath routes make the system balance packets across several links according to the weight (higher weight is preferred, so gateway/interface with weight of 2 will get roughly two times more traffic than another one with weight of 1)". (from: https://baturin.org/docs/iproute2/#Route%20management) Trouble is, it doesn't look like it works that way - but I need to watch it for a while. Anyway I guess it isn't really Shorewall doing this, rather iproute2. - Norm On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 7:29 PM Tom Eastep <teas...@shorewall.net> wrote: > On 1/10/19 9:18 AM, Norman Henderson wrote: > > Thank you Tom. Can you clarify the significance of the numbers: > > e.g. provider a weight 1, provider b weight 10, provider c weight 100, > > which provider is preferred and what will be the proportional allocation > > of new flows? > > New flows will be apportioned in the same proportions as the weights. It > is my understanding that the algorithm builds a list containing "weight" > number of entries for each provider. Flows are then allocated using a > round-robin approach. I don't know how this list is ordered. > > -Tom > -- > Tom Eastep \ Q: What do you get when you cross a mobster with > Shoreline, \ an international standard? > Washington, USA \ A: Someone who makes you an offer you can't > http://shorewall.org \ understand > \_______________________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > Shorewall-users mailing list > Shorewall-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users >
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list Shorewall-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
