MPD Multiple PPPoE to same ISP

Nikos Vassiliadis nvass9573 at gmx.com
Sat Nov 21 17:20:30 UTC 2009


Thodoris S. wrote:
> I am trying to make Multiple PPPoE Connections to the Same ISP for
> Load Balancing  reasons
> my mpd.conf is:
> default:
>         load adsl0
>         load adsl1
>         load adsl2
> 
> adsl0:
>         new -i ng0 pppoe0 pppoe0
>         set iface route default
>         set iface disable on-demand
>         set iface idle 0
>         set bundle disable multilink
>         set bundle authname "***"
>         set bundle password "***"
>         set bundle no noretry
>         set link keep-alive 10 60
>         set link max-redial 0
>         set link no acfcomp protocomp
>         set link disable pap chap
>         set link accept chap
>         set link mtu 1492
>         set ipcp yes vjcomp
>         set ipcp ranges 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0/0
>         set ipcp enable req-pri-dns
>         set ipcp enable req-sec-dns
>         open
> 
> adsl1:
>         new -i ng1 pppoe1 pppoe1
>         set iface route default
>         set iface disable on-demand
>         set iface idle 0
>         set bundle disable multilink
>         set bundle authname "***"
>         set bundle password "***"
>         set bundle no noretry
>         set link keep-alive 10 60
>         set link max-redial 0
>         set link no acfcomp protocomp
>         set link disable pap chap
>         set link accept chap
>         set link mtu 1492
>         set ipcp yes vjcomp
>         set ipcp ranges 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0/0
>         set ipcp enable req-pri-dns
>         set ipcp enable req-sec-dns
>         open
> 
> adsl2:
>         new -i ng2 pppoe2 pppoe2
>         set iface route default
>         set iface disable on-demand
>         set iface idle 0
>         set bundle disable multilink
>         set bundle authname "***"
>         set bundle password "***"
>         set bundle no noretry
>         set link keep-alive 10 60
>         set link max-redial 0
>         set link no acfcomp protocomp
>         set link disable pap chap
>         set link accept chap
>         set link mtu 1492
>         set ipcp yes vjcomp
>         set ipcp ranges 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0/0
>         set ipcp enable req-pri-dns
>         set ipcp enable req-sec-dns
>         open
> 
> And mpd.links is:
> pppoe0:
>         set link type pppoe
>         set pppoe iface em0
>         set pppoe service "we"
>         set pppoe enable originate
>         set pppoe disable incoming
> 
> pppoe1:
>         set link type pppoe
>         set pppoe iface em1
>         set pppoe service "we1"
>         set pppoe enable originate
>         set pppoe disable incoming
> 
> pppoe2:
>         set link type pppoe
>         set pppoe iface bce1
>         set pppoe service "we2"
>         set pppoe enable originate
>         set pppoe disable incoming
> 
> The problem is tha only one (the first logged in) ng interface gets ip
> assigned to it, all others assigned to lo0 interface
> and when i am trying to NAT them with PF it gives me this error:
> /etc/pf.conf:26: could not parse host specification
> 
> im giving you ifconfig and netstat -nr
> 
> ifconfig:
> [root at emperor ~]# ifconfig
> bce0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> 	options=1bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4>
> 	ether 00:1e:c9:db:24:7f
> 	inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast 192.168.0.7
> 	media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX <full-duplex>)
> 	status: active
> em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> 	options=19b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4>
> 	ether 00:15:17:78:fd:56
> 	inet 192.168.101.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.101.255
> 	media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
> 	status: active
> em1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> 	options=19b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4>
> 	ether 00:15:17:78:fb:41
> 	inet 192.168.102.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.102.255
> 	media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
> 	status: active
> bce1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> 	options=1bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4>
> 	ether 00:1e:c9:db:24:7d
> 	inet 192.168.103.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.103.255
> 	media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
> 	status: active
> lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 16384
> 	inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
> 	inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
> 	inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
> pflog0: flags=141<UP,RUNNING,PROMISC> metric 0 mtu 33204
> ng0: flags=88d1<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric
> 0 mtu 1492
> 	inet 11.11.11.11 --> 12.12.12.2 netmask 0xffffffff
> ng1: flags=88d1<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric
> 0 mtu 1492
> ng2: flags=88d1<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric
> 0 mtu 1492
> 
> nestat -nr:
> Routing tables
> 
> Internet:
> Destination        Gateway            Flags    Refs      Use  Netif Expire
> default            192.168.0.2      UGS         0    13812   bce0
> 192.168.0.0/29   link#1             UC          0        0   bce0
> 12.12.12.2       11.11.11.11       UH          0        0    ng0
> 33.33.33.33       lo0                UHS         0     4797    lo0
> 22.22.22.22        lo0                UHS         0     1370    lo0
> 11.11.11.11       lo0                UHS         0        0    lo0
> 127.0.0.1          127.0.0.1          UH          0        0    lo0
> 192.168.101.0/24   link#2             UC          0        0    em0
> 192.168.102.0/24   link#3             UC          0        0    em1
> 192.168.103.0/24   link#4             UC          0        0   bce1
> 

Could you add to your kernel config "options RADIX_MPATH" and give it
a go then?

It seems that you try to add a second point-to-point interface with
the same destination address. For example:
ng0 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2 and
ng1 1.1.1.2 2.2.2.2 etc

This is not valid without the aforementioned kernel option.

I *think* it will be ok then, but do try and report back to the list
your findings.

HTH, Nikos



More information about the freebsd-net mailing list