>As a biproduct, if I can gain downloading speed that would be an added >benefit. I remember hearing about shotgunning analog lines years ago >for a 126Kbps link. I figure I could "shotgun" these links and get T1 >speeds at a fraction of the cost. Granted I will have a wide pipe with >high latency. Nope, sorry. It only works with modem lines when you have them to the same ISP, and that ISP must support multilink PPP. You could increase your outgoing with a spiffy packet spoofing kernel module, but if your ISP has their routers set up correctly, they won't pass packets out with a source address that doesn't exist within their address space. Plus, doing that on a packet by packet level will probably just get you really sketchy uploads since packets will arrive way out of order, and if one ISP has much greater latency than the other, the tcp packets will miss their windows and have to be resent. Plus, because of the out of order packet issue, streaming audio or video would be out of the question. You can probably get some redundancy with a round robin dns entry and two webservers (one on each link). But you'll need to work out a way for the dns server to monitor your servers/links from afar and not hand out the ip to the server that is not accessible. You can probably find something on freshmeat.net. Take a look at Eddie also, http://www.eddieware.org. In any case, you will never get t1 speeds when downloading, the max speed will always be the max speed of one of the DSL lines (assuming there is no other traffic on it). You can only multiply your incoming bandwidth like that when both lines go to the same ISP. Trust me on this, I maintain over 535Mbit of connectivity consisting of a bunch of DS3's from multiple providers, and a couple of 100Mbit Ethernet links coming off some equipment connected to OC-192's. If you want more bandwidth, and you're running a commercial site, just break down and get the $420/mo T1 from Onvoy.com (loop fee extra, but was only $200 for me). If you simply want the redundancy, you may be able to get Eddie to work for you. DSL is not a good solution for running important sites off of, I tried it for awhile, and still do run stuff off mine, but it's not that reliable, and you get no SLA unless you pay $400/mo for business class DSL, in which case you're better off just getting the Onvoy T1 deal (note: I don't work for them :). Jay -----Original Message----- From: Marc Ohmann [mailto:mohmann at qwest.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 6:26 PM To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org Subject: Re: [TCLUG] internet-connection load-balancing I am not really trying to gain speed as much as redundancy. However, along with the redundancy I should be able to serve more requests at a given moment. Why pay for another line to just sit there for redundancy sake... I might as well use it too. It is also meant as a lesson in load balancing for myself -- if I can do it with dsl I should be able to apply what I've learned to any link, dsl just happens to be the cheapest digital link at the moment. As a biproduct, if I can gain downloading speed that would be an added benefit. I remember hearing about shotgunning analog lines years ago for a 126Kbps link. I figure I could "shotgun" these links and get T1 speeds at a fraction of the cost. Granted I will have a wide pipe with high latency. Thanks, Marc Scott Dier wrote: >>Does anyone out there have any experience load balancing internet >>connections (DSL in this case) using Linux? If so, what are the >>implications when the connections are provided by separate ISPs? And >> > >What are you trying to gain, in paticular? > >downloading or serving speed? redundancy? etc... > _______________________________________________ tclug-list mailing list tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list