Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964790AbWIPMNm (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:13:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964791AbWIPMNm (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:13:42 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.174]:31918 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964790AbWIPMNm (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:13:42 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mFy7FeLT+fmVWFF2D8ael7vEIJHwk9Tu8FOJXcZ6BsOmbAo3IoisoIvYe1SC5PqU4nyL+qLrAPo3Nja8WnKDilpN9TDxfirqXFXjB/Zdb1zrU8/QNDFTnoGmX9N//0YtSrflCpxPgNg2039MKzz+C+aHd+tY4gOZWPgx3wIrZZw= Message-ID: Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 20:13:40 +0800 From: "xixi lii" To: davids@webmaster.com Subject: Re: UDP question. Cc: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2210 Lines: 51 2006/9/16, David Schwartz : > > > Let me explain my network environment, My program is running on a two > > adapters machine, whose IP is 192.168.0.1/8 and 192.168.0.2/8, then, > > my destination is two machine, whose IP is 192.168.0.3/8 and > > 192.168.0.4/8. I use four 100M exchange and a 1000M exchange cennected > > them to ensure the choke point is not at network equipment. > > So both interfaces are part of the same network, and the machines are not > connected to the Internet? (The host ns4.bbn.com is 192.1.122.13, for > example.) > > > when I use two socket without bonding, one socket is bind > > 192.168.0.1/8 and sendto 192.168.0.3/8, the other is bind > > 192.168.0.2/8 and sendto 192.168.0.4/8, but, as you see, I get a > > result that the speed of send by two adapters is equal to the only one > > adapter's. > > None of your code gives the kernel any reason to prefer one interface over > the other. Why would an interface bound to 192.168.0.1 be better than one > for 192.168.0.2 if you're sending to 192.168.0.3? > > > yesterday. I got an uncertain idea, is the problem that IP layer is > > separate with Eth layer ? when I bind src IP, it just do helpful to IP > > layer, not real bind the adapter? when I send, the real ethreal > > adapter is select by IP route? If the two interface can go > > destinnation both, IP layer will choose the frist, not use both? Am I > > right? > > Correct, you are binding to the adapter's address, not to the adapter. The > IP routing layer still determines which interface a packet is transmitted > on. > > > If so, when I use bonding, the adapter's physical address is the frist > > one, Do this means that all of the packet come to my machine will go > > through in the frist one adapter? > > It depends how you have the IP routing layer configured. You can configure > it to select the adapter based on the source address if you want to. then how do I configure this? > > DS > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/