LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking
User Name
Password
Linux - Networking This forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 12-15-2005, 04:38 PM   #1
TBKDan
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: NY, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 44

Rep: Reputation: 16
2 NIC (not load balancing persay)


Ok, I first started out thinking that this was more related to iptables/firewall issues so I started a post in there, but as I learned a bit more with linux networking it is seeming to be related more to routing. Now, lemme explain the situation
I am going to a college that has a nice chunk of bandwidth (dual OC-3's and a T3), but they only allow roughly 100kb/s per IP to students, so I figured get a few network cards and that will give me more bandwidth. This was working perfectly on Windows, but I recently migrated to Debian linux (woody) since it seemed to run much smoother and less resource hungry (duh lol). But recently people were complaining of lag issues (I run two gameservers on two separate IP's), so I was looking around for a possibility but couldn't find anything. But while I was looking at something else I noticed something strange:
Code:
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  xxx
          inet addr:129.21.112.xxx  Bcast:129.21.112.xxx  Mask:255.255.255.128
          inet6 addr: xxx/64 Scope:Link
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:7370142 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:210 frame:0
          TX packets:7892342 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:686159221 (654.3 MiB)  TX bytes:1208223777 (1.1 GiB)
          Interrupt:177 Base address:0xc000

eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr xxx
          inet addr:129.21.112.xxx  Bcast:129.21.112.xxx  Mask:255.255.255.128
          inet6 addr: xxx/64 Scope:Link
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:420855 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:17 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:38880818 (37.0 MiB)  TX bytes:2850 (2.7 KiB)
          Interrupt:185 Base address:0xc400
Both cards are receiving their respective traffic, but it's only transmitting back on eth0. Well, this kinda defeats the original purpose I had in mind :P So I've been looking around for how to get around this, and it sounds like it's the routing tables... rather, it is the routing tables. But I'm on a school network where I can't change the gateway or anything along those lines, so I am really stumped as to how I can get eth0 to transmit on eth0 and eth1 to transmit on eth1... any ideas? BTW, here's my routing table:
Code:
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
129.21.112.0    *               255.255.255.128 U     0      0        0 eth0
129.21.112.0    *               255.255.255.128 U     0      0        0 eth1
129.21.112.0    *               255.255.255.128 U     0      0        0 eth2
default         rit-xxx         0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0
 
Old 12-15-2005, 06:57 PM   #2
Brian1
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Seymour, Indiana
Distribution: Distribution: RHEL 5 with Pieces of this and that. Kernel 2.6.23.1, KDE 3.5.8 and KDE 4.0 beta, Plu
Posts: 5,700

Rep: Reputation: 64
Are you bonding the ethernet channels? Check out this link if not: http://www.devco.net/archives/2004/1...et_bonding.php

Where is your other post?

Hope this helps.
Brian1
 
Old 12-15-2005, 07:20 PM   #3
TBKDan
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: NY, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 44

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 16
I don't know if that's what I want though, because I need each card to have it's own individual IP and I don't know if load balancing is what I'm looking for. I'd rather just have each card be separate and have nothing to do with each other.
 
Old 12-15-2005, 09:46 PM   #4
TBKDan
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: NY, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 44

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 16
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=392943
Just saw you were asking where the other post was
 
Old 12-16-2005, 02:38 PM   #5
TBKDan
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: NY, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 44

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 16
Anybody?
 
Old 12-19-2005, 03:04 PM   #6
LinuxInductee
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
Your multiNIC, bandwidth boost will work if your gamers are all connected off your switch. It will do nothing for you past your single wall jack, other than redundancy, in serial.

Now, to get the traffic to work on your other IPs. It's a configuration between the clients and the daemon. You'd have to get 1/3rd of your clients to use the first IP, the 2nd 3rd on the second IP, .... you get the picture. That manages the clients.

Then you have to ensure your daemon is configured to listen and publish on each of the ports. Typically it might mean 3 daemons. That assumes you have some engine running that those multiple daemons connect to. If your engine and socket daemons are integrated, then you will need to research how to configure that daemon to use multiNICs. In the case of Apache, for example, you can configure it either way. Meaning either multiple daemons, each with it's own config and IP. Or Multiple IPs on one daemon.

Since splitting the load is important, and if your socket daemons are separate from the gaming engine, and you have the RAM, then that would be your optimal configuration.

Good gaming, may your packets not collide.
 
Old 12-20-2005, 02:15 PM   #7
TBKDan
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: NY, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 44

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 16
I have the gameserver configured to listen on the correct IP's, but the problem is that it doesn't transmit back on each individual IP, it just transmits out on eth0. Would it be possible to just uninstall route and would each NIC transmit to the gateway on it's own?

Last edited by TBKDan; 12-20-2005 at 02:50 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to do load balancing tkt Linux - Networking 0 04-27-2005 01:22 AM
Load Balancing otisthegbs Linux - Networking 4 02-10-2005 02:16 PM
Load Balancing matux Linux - Networking 0 01-05-2005 10:59 AM
Load Balancing? gsibble Linux - Networking 3 12-09-2003 10:39 PM
Load balancing ?? Lucsi Linux - Newbie 1 07-16-2002 12:54 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration