Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!inquo!inquo.net!pete From: pete@inquo.net (Pete Kruckenberg) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Is Multi-Link PPP available? Date: 29 Oct 1995 23:22:45 GMT Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 Lines: 44 Distribution: world Message-ID: <4712c5$6cr@xymox.dsw.com> References: <45n7ht$81a@rob.inetdirect.net> <3085E6AA.41C67EA6@FreeBSD.org> <465qeh$dmf@news.bu.edu> <46ah2v$g2h@uriah.heep.sax.de> <46qneg$6j3@cooking.extremes.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: inquo.net X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Jason Fordham (jclf@extremes.net) wrote: : j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) wrote: : >Mikhail Teterin <mi@bu.edu> wrote: : > : >>Wait, what is that : >> pseudo ppp 2 : >> ~ : >>for? Never had two modems, but what if I just start two pppd with different : >>settings? I thought It would give me two network interfaces... : > : >Of course, but you cannot route the traffic intented for just a single : >remote peer over two different IP interfaces. : That said, you should be able to route outgoing traffic over one interface : and incoming traffic over the other. [stuff about how to do it deleted] Linux can do this. Peeking at the Linux code for ECL might give some ideas on how to start implementing it for FreeBSD. The concept is simple: just alternate between the lines for each packet. Each end must do the same. Include receiving a packet as a signal to alternate. You'll get approximately 25-75% performance improvement : Of course, I could be wrong! We use a similar method for pairs of T1's, : which definitely seems to work. The problem with this is that you still have a maximum *in-coming* and *out-going* bandwidth of one T1. That's OK if your traffic is evenly spread between in-coming and out-going, but that's only going to be the case if you have a lot of traffic going out. In most cases, in-coming traffic will be anywhere from 5 to 100 times the out-going traffic, so one T1 is saturated, the other is almost idle. As long as you're paying for both of them, and they both go to the same router, you would be better off combining them into one virtual 2xT1 line, and you won't lose anything (if one goes down, the other will automatically take over). Ciscos have this capability built in, as do most other decent routers. Pete Kruckenberg pete@inquo.net