Re: Linux/FreeBSD Channel Bonding Interoperability

From: Julian Elischer (julian_at_elischer.org)
Date: 05/28/05

  • Next message: Mike Silbersack: "Re: iwi driver: Probes but no association (FreeBSD5.4)." 
    Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 18:30:47 -0700
To: Florent Thoumie <flz@xbsd.org>

    from what I'm reading about teql you can do this with a couple of methods..

    ipfw and the 'fwd' rule
    netgraph and ng_one2many

    there may be more..

    teql doesn't seem to modify the packets in any way, just to make them go
    across several links
    so both of those should work I think.

    the ipfw fwd method would require ip addresses on both interfaces.
    the netgraph method may be able to do it without that requirement.
    (linking to an ng_eiface node with a single address).

    Florent Thoumie wrote:

    >Le Vendredi 27 mai 2005 à 11:27 -0700, Julian Elischer a écrit :
    >
    >
    >>probably this would be better in net@freebsd.org
    >>
    >>
    >
    > Moved to net@.
    >
    >
    >
    >>Florent Thoumie wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Hey list.
    >>>
    >>> I'm advocating for FreeBSD for about 6 months now where I'm
    >>> working and they have the project to build their own router
    >>> (which will probably be based on WRAP).
    >>>
    >>> The good point is that the actual solution is running Linux
    >>> but it's not highly reliable. The bad point is that they're
    >>> using channel bonding (on both peers) and they don't want to
    >>> change one (or at least the system it runs).
    >>>
    >>> I've read about ng_fec and ng_onetomany, so I know channel
    >>> bonding is quite easy (seems so, according to web pages I've
    >>> found) but I guess FreeBSD and Linux won't work correctly.
    >>> If that's the case, I wondered if it could be much aspossible to add a
    >>> new node to "translate" stuff so that both could communicate
    >>> correctly.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>how you do it depends entirely on how they are doing the bonding in Linux.
    >>you do not give any clues as to what modules they are using.
    >>
    >>
    >
    > After some investigation, it seems they are using teql on
    > Linux, which is different from bonding (bonding doesn't seem
    > to be able to use two different connections types, especially
    > when these are not ethernet). I'd like to aggregate one ADSL
    > line with a SDSL line. I'm not sure teql works like
    > ng_onetomany. Stephen Montgomery-Smith told me by private email
    > that he knew somebody who successfully used Linux and FreeBSD
    > together to do bonding. I really need to try it, I'm just
    > lacking some hardware at the moment.
    >
    >
    >
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Mike Silbersack: "Re: iwi driver: Probes but no association (FreeBSD5.4)."

    Relevant Pages