diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101025/002652.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101025/002652.html | 164 |
1 files changed, 164 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101025/002652.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101025/002652.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..82fda0873 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101025/002652.html @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20network%20balancing%20by%20default&In-Reply-To=%3C201010252257.06518.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="002651.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="002620.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default</H1> + <B>Maarten Vanraes</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20network%20balancing%20by%20default&In-Reply-To=%3C201010252257.06518.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default">maarten.vanraes at gmail.com + </A><BR> + <I>Mon Oct 25 22:57:06 CEST 2010</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="002651.html">[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002620.html">[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#2652">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#2652">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#2652">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#2652">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Op maandag 25 oktober 2010 22:07:16 schreef Luca Berra: +><i> >> >E is a bit of an extra (it's not really routing, but a DNS that's down +</I>><i> >> >(does not answer) could well be eliminated (not sure if this should be +</I>><i> >> >done separately or not)) OTOH, failure of the recursive DNS of the ISP +</I>><i> >> >seems to be somewhat frequent in my experience. +</I>><i> >> +</I>><i> >> so a connectivity issue will leave users without dns? +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >more the other way around; in the event of dns failure; the dns of the +</I>><i> >other gateway could be used. if it would be a routing issue to the DNS +</I>><i> >(and others), then other rules could be triggered (C+D) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> this has to be implemented very well, my comment was sarcastic, if you +</I>><i> do it badly (i.e. pruning and not reinstating dns you will sooner or +</I>><i> later end with none) +</I> +imo, this can be handled just like ifup and the like do it; but i'm not sure +if i would have this option on by default. + +><i> >> >C+D are tricky: D is even a bit of a grey area; my ISP frequently has a +</I>><i> >> >few routes broken. icmp can definately not be relied on in all cases. +</I>><i> >> >and even if you ping your gateway, you don't know if it goes any +</I>><i> >> >further. +</I>><i> >> > +</I>><i> >> >This could be circumvented by putting known servers that actually echo +</I>><i> >> >icmp in a list and ping those. but for that matter, it doesn't have to +</I>><i> >> >be icmp; we could easily have a list of public services that can be +</I>><i> >> >connected to. but is this really what we want? +</I>><i> >> > +</I>><i> >> >We could even just monitor how much packets are unreplied to per +</I>><i> >> >interface and choose that. +</I>><i> >> > +</I>><i> >> >Or we could try to have each retry of unreplied packet go through the +</I>><i> >> >next default route. +</I>><i> >> > +</I>><i> >> >Or we could just not handle that (like it is now). +</I>><i> >> +</I>><i> >> +1 +</I>><i> >> you are considering the only scenario of a home user. doing some things +</I>><i> >> you propose above would prevent using mageia in any medium sized +</I>><i> >> network. (i.e. i could not use my mageia laptop at work) +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >I don't see what you mean by this. i list 4 options; knowing full well +</I>><i> >that some of those options are not usefull by default. also, this is only +</I>><i> >required if more than one default gateway is active; which is a small +</I>><i> >percentage in itself. (my personal favourite is having it sent to the +</I>><i> >other default gateway after failure; or seeing which has more unreplied +</I>><i> >packets; and then check some public services) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> i mean that if mageia is known for misbehaving wrt dhcp leases corporate +</I>><i> policies will start including a ban on mageia. +</I> +right, i understand now. + +><i> >> >remember that right now only A(+B) is used; and having balanced default +</I>><i> >> >routes would probably mean that there is 50% packet loss, instead of +</I>><i> >> >100% in most cases. +</I>><i> >> +</I>><i> >> which may be worse. +</I>><i> >> if nothing works the user will try switching to a different connection +</I>><i> >> if stuff do not work at random the user will not know what to do. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >it could be worse, depending on the type of person. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >> btw, the assumption about 50% is flawed, i don't know if it is an +</I>><i> >> oversimplification or a failure to understand how load balancing over +</I>><i> >> multiple network links work in practice. +</I>><i> >> it is not round-robin, it is route-based (on ip hash) +</I>><i> >> the result of a failure upstream will result in the user being able to, +</I>><i> >> say, watch some videos on youtube, but not update her fb profile, or +</I>><i> >> worse. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >i meant on average in total, depending on what kind of balancing is used. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> I believe you cannot change the ip load balancing method. +</I> +I mean there are several rules that can be used to decide what balancing is +used; the most common one being the weighted one. + +><i> I would prefer an option (not active by default) that would allow users +</I>><i> to decide preferred default network connections and fail over to backup +</I>><i> network connections if the active one fails (possibly allowing failback, +</I>><i> but not by default). +</I>><i> It could implement some smart way of finding wether a connection is +</I>><i> actually working. But data to do this has to be user supplied, it is too +</I>><i> difficult to find the right one with so diverse possible networking +</I>><i> environments. +</I>><i> I'd leave all load balancing out of the picture, it is very difficult to +</I>><i> get right. +</I>><i> Even interface bonding with tlb can be disruptive to network setups. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> L. +</I> + +i have seen lots of environments that have wifi direct out access and the +cabled access being internal and having extra access to internal servers. +(also some the other way around too.) + +I think we should allow multiple configurable policies for this; but we should +try to find one that will work well for everyone and use that one as default. + + +if one interface has all it's packets unreplied for X time (30sec with a +minimum of 10 packets?) we could evaluate that interface to be temporarily +down. i think this kind of setup would work for everyone. + +just my thoughts, + +Maarten +</PRE> + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="002651.html">[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002620.html">[Mageia-discuss] network balancing by default +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#2652">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#2652">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#2652">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#2652">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss">More information about the Mageia-discuss +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |