[6510] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Nanog list uncharacteristically quiet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Caputo)
Sun Dec 15 14:21:47 1996
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 11:14:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199612151700.JAA15402@wisdom.home.vix.com>
Sounds like this would make everything be symmetrically routed. Has
anyone researched whether this can scale? Will you handle the case where
the interface a flow uses changes during the course of the flow? I assume
this will lead to "round robin default" until an inbound packet for the
flow is received from a new interface. Will the "round robin default"
favor uncongested or highest speed links?
I can't wait to hear the results of doing this!
Chris
On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Paul A Vixie wrote:
> not so. right now our multihomed web gateways need a full routing table.
> that's pretty complicated, for my operator and for my customer's providers.
> we're shortly moving to an "interface default" such that all inbound streams
> will have their outbound route chosen as the incoming interface's default,
> and all outbound streams will get a "round robin default" outbound route
> that will then be rebound to the SYN-ACK's incoming route, in case the
> original source route is better-reachable by "this" destination via some
> other interface, a not uncommon case these days.
>
> this adds about 2 pages of code to the kernel. but it's a lot less complex
> than taking a full routing table from multiple providers.
>
