Newshosting vpn ubuntu6/22/2023 ![]() ![]() Nonetheless, Newshosting seems content with sacrificing a share of their profits for the sake of keeping their crown as one of the technologically most advanced Usenet providers in the world. An important thing to note: Retention is increased almost daily at Newshosting – an endeavor which of course necessitates immense investments in the server infrastructure. With a retention rate of 4,544 days (equivalent to over twelve years), this provider is also close to being the industry leader in terms of binary retention. Because each and every file is copied and stored at least a handful of times on multiple servers, it is not just possible, but easy to access a wealth of information through the Newshosting network. They also feature one of the most varied selections of newsgroups – over 110,00 can be accessed via the Newshosting software alone. Newshosting does not just stop at cutting all limitations on the server side of things. If you go for one of the premium packages, neither download speeds nor data volume will be limited, a great advantage for power users in particular. Anyway, take a look at these:Ĭlick on network load balancing on the left.īarracuda had a similar but seemingly less capable product.One more thing that sets Newshosting apart is that their servers, located across the EU and North America, automatically select the best connection for your location and signal strength, always providing top speeds and interference-free connections. (IE: if I was only willing to spend X $ I wouldn't have to spend Y hours). ![]() ![]() This is useful for a couple of reasons:Ģ) It gives me an understanding of how they are treating the problem so that parallel solutions can be sought in the linux world.ģ) It lets me know the ceiling of money (read effort) involved in addressing the challange. I also found several hardware, proprietary, solutions for dealing with this problem. I did find a lot of "Hey check out my hack!" stuff that was half fast treatment of this very complex problem. This was the most comprehensive solution for the open source community I could find. Nothing says you couldn't use similar software on Ubuntu to duplicate the results. The best open source treatment of the problem I had seen was actually done with freeBSD 4.x. To be clear I want to restate what the "this" is:ġ) Multiple low cost ISPs providing access to a single facilityĢ) The ISPs come with their own network address space and don't interoperate directly.Ĥ) I want to aggregate all of the bandwidthĥ) I want to perform transparent failover when possible if any of the ISPs stop routing for some reason. I've been looking into this and similar problems for a while. Somebody with a similar problem on a mailing-list, but no answer () Routing for multiple uplinks/providers () Because, all 3 tunnels passes through the default route on eth1 (ISP1), instead of allocating 1 tunnel to 1 iface (ISP). I can create 3 VPN easily (tap0, tap1, tap2), but I can't figure out how to force tap0 to use eth0, tap1 to use eth1, and tap2 to use eth2. Right now, I'm stuck with vtun () and creating a VPN for each iface. For example, in Ubuntu youll need to start up a Terminal window (just click. The theory seems to be good, but I don't have enough Linux expertise to achieve this, does anyone have already set-up something like this ? Usenet providers use SSL encryption but youd need to pay for a VPN service. On the Datacenter's server, configure iptables (MASQUERADING ?) in order to route all traffic coming from the VPNs connections to Internet Make 3 VPN connections (1 for each ISP) from our Linux router to our Datacenter' Serverīond these 3 VPN connection using "Linux Ethernet Bonding" (ifenslave package), resulting in a new bond0 interfaceĬonfigure our linux router to use bond0 to access Internet (create a new route ?) What I'm looking for is aggregate the links of our 3 ISPs (15+15+30= 60 Mbps !!) through a server in a datacenter (with a big Internet pipe : >100 Mbps). ![]() I also know that I can use MLPPP, but the ISPs need to support it, so it's not a solution for me. I know that I can load-balance using iproute or iptables, but this is not what I'm looking for. eth0 (LAN : 192.168.0.0/24) connected to a simple switchĮth1, eth2 and eth3 have their own IP & Gateway all different. PC Linux Router (in our office) with 4 NICs cards : I want to aggregate (not load-balance) multiples (in my case 3) xDSL lines (all differents ISPs) on my linux router. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |