gcams

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Solution for Huawei E367 3G dongle on Zeroshell #51805
    gcams
    Member
    Zeqro wrote:
    gcams, I don’t know how silly this sounds but can you help me with the following?

    When I create a post boot script and save my profile it’s not loaded up on restart. In fact the script is deleted and the files saved inside the Database are deleted.

    I understand that this is happening because my files / settings aren’t being saved. But where do I need to set the option to save them then?

    What I tried to do is do all the settings and then save the profile but this didn’t seem to do anything useful. On the main page (zeroshell.net) the FAQ say you need to go to Setup -> Storage on the web interface but I cannot find that anywhere…

    Hope you can help.

    Really not too sure what would be causing this!? I haven’t seen this behaviour on my Alix setup running off a compact flash card and I don’t really know enough about how Zeroshell deals with it’s filesystems to be able to troubleshoot it for you. Sorry! Hope you manage to get it sorted.

    in reply to: Solution for Huawei E367 3G dongle on Zeroshell #51804
    gcams
    Member
    Dave.R wrote:
    Hi man you said you used ZTE can you please name the model you used and the way you configured it to work with zeroshell .
    thanks allot ,

    Hi Dave, the model of ZTE I have is an MF112 HSUPA dongle. It was very simple to setup.. you just need to eject the virtual CD-ROM device that mounts when the dongle is plugged in, to get it to modeswitch (i.e. on mine I need to eject /dev/sr0). This causes the USB serial ports to show up.

    The only trick was I needed to copy the eject command from a linux distro, as Zeroshell doesn’t have it installed by default. I think I used the eject binary from one of the later fedora distributions and it worked fine.

    I hope that is of some help??

    Cheers,
    Graham

    in reply to: Solution for Huawei E367 3G dongle on Zeroshell #51800
    gcams
    Member

    I’m glad the post was helpful Zeqro. Yes it would be good to have an updated version of usb_modeswitch in zeroshell, which would support the new dongles natively.

    Good to hear that my fix works with the new E175 too though! That’s handy to know!

    in reply to: Multi Channel Site-to-Site Broadband Bonding #51797
    gcams
    Member

    Hi Trevor,

    Yes it can certainly be done and zeroshell is well equipped to do it.

    Take a look at the links relating to bonding here:

    http://zeroshell.net/eng/documentation/

    There’s even a youtube video of setting it up.

    Hopefully this will provide a starting point for you.

    Cheers,
    Graham

    in reply to: Bond internet connections #51719
    gcams
    Member

    Hi surfsup,

    I replied to your other question above, but I’m not sure if you’ve read this:

    http://zeroshell.net/eng/load-balancing-failover/

    It gives a very good description of what you can achieve with the Net Balance component of Zeroshell.

    Cheers,
    Graham

    in reply to: Layer 3 Bonding? #51780
    gcams
    Member

    Hi surfsup,

    I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “layer 3” bonding?? Layer 3, by it’s very nature, performs load balancing and fail over via standard routing protocols, such as BGP or OSPF.

    In order to do this properly, you would need co-operation from your ISP(s) to route down a subnet to your zeroshell device.

    It is possible to bond 2 x layer 2 TAP interfaces over 2 x layer 3 VPN’s. By VPNing to a remote host, and using that remote host as your exit point, you can effectively aggregate the bandwidth of the multiple connections.

    However I tried doing this using various permutations, over multiple 3G connections and whilst it did work, if one of the connections in the bond fails, it doesn’t fail particularly gracefully.

    Not sure if that answers your question, or helps at all?

    in reply to: Zeroshell Lan to Lan VPN bonding to CentOS server? #47381
    gcams
    Member

    Hi Jason,

    In short, after many combinations of configurations, I could never get the fail-over to work reliably. I would always end up with packet loss for a period of time until the failed link was marked as “down”, and removed from the routing table. With the VPN running over the net-balanced link, it caused the VPN to hang for this period of time (which wasnt’ acceptable for my use).

    I’ve now done away with the VPN altogether, and have used https to secure my traffic. Not really a solution per se, but it works fine for me.

    Sorry I couldn’t offer a better solution for your situation. I’d be interested if you find a way around the issues I encountered.

    Cheers,
    Graham

    in reply to: bc online calculator binary for zeroshell? #50782
    gcams
    Member

    That is incredibly kind of you houkouonchi!! I’ll PM you shortly!

    Kind regard,
    Graham (gcams)

    in reply to: bc online calculator binary for zeroshell? #50780
    gcams
    Member

    With a bit more trial and error, I found the binaries in the Fedora 10 packageworked fine.

    I think I found the issue though, with the OpenWRT binary.

    BC seems to be comprised of two binaries.. one called “bc” the other called “dc”. It would seem bc calls dc internally (probably the cause of the “No such file or directory” error seen earlier.

    With the OpenWRT package, bc and dc are packaged separately (I only installed bc). However the fedora package includes both binaries by default, which prompted me to copy both across. Then it worked fine!

    Thought I’d post the solution here, just in case anybody else needs this.

    in reply to: bc online calculator binary for zeroshell? #50779
    gcams
    Member

    Hi ppalias,

    Many thanks for the suggestion! I never thought of trying that. Unfortunately I’ve installed the binary from openwrt and given it a go, and when trying to execute bc I get the error “bash: ./bc: No such file or directory”.

    After doing a bit of googling on this, it appears this is indeed related to some sort of library/build issue. 🙁 Back to square one!

    I’ve got access to a full linux system (Centos 5).. is there some way I could use this to build a compatible binary for zeroshell I wonder? I’m just not that clued up on trying to setup dev environments though.

    in reply to: Connection from internet to 3G modem #48474
    gcams
    Member

    I have achieved this using a VPN. You need to setup a VPN between the zeroshell box and a host on the internet. You can then connect back down the VPN to the zeroshell box via the host. The only problem is if the VPN drops out, and doesn’t recover, you cannot get back into the box.

    The other option would be to setup a persistent SSH tunnel from the zeroshell box to a host, and use port forwarding over SSH to achieve the same result. I guess this is a similar concept to the VPN, but I used the VPN option.

    Hope this helps!

    in reply to: Disabling serial console to allow serial port to be used. #47608
    gcams
    Member

    Thanks fulvio, that’s a big help! Much appreciated!!

    in reply to: Zeroshell Lan to Lan VPN bonding to CentOS server? #47379
    gcams
    Member

    I thought I’d post a quick update, now that I’ve given this setup a go.

    I’ve managed to get reasonable load balancing/fail over using Zeroshell to a Centos V5.1 box (running OpenVPN). However I have struck a few challenges.

    On the Centos box, I’ve simply created two layer 2 virtual adapters (tap0/tap1) and have used the bonding module to bond these together in mode 0 (fail over + round robin load balancing).

    On zeroshell, I’ve followed the guidelines for configuring layer 2 bonding in the net balancing section. I have 2 3G USB modems on two different networks (3 and vodafone), and each VPN config is assigned to each respective PPP adapter for the above modems.

    The problem is, this works fine initially, when the VPN’s first dial up (i.e. they connect via their respective modems), however when a simulated failure takes place, the VPN on the failed PPP adapter re-connects via the other adapter (thus ignoring the setting saying to only connect via the set PPP adapter). This caused two problems.. one it causes packet loss whilst the packets are round-robined across the downed VPN, until it re-negotiates across to the remaining working link, and two, when the failed PPP adapter comes back up, the VPN remains connected on the alternate adapter (so there are effectively two vpn tunnels going down the one interface and nothing on the other).

    I’ve managed to work around this by disabling net balancer, and using static routes to force each VPN to remain on each adapter, regardless (which uses the bonding failover to provide resilience). But this requires 2 IP’s on the Centos box (which is acting as the server). I’m not sure if anyone can shed any light on this behavior? Basically the Net Balancer seems to be causing issues with the fail-over/load balancing of the bonded interface.

    in general though, I’m really impressed with how versatile Zeroshell is!! Many thanks fulvio!!!! 😀

    in reply to: Zeroshell Lan to Lan VPN bonding to CentOS server? #47378
    gcams
    Member

    Thanks for your speedy reply Fulvio, I was worried that might be the case.

    Unfortunately, I’m using a cloud computing solution for my server (GoGrid) and therefore don’t have the option to install a dedicated Zeroshell box at the server end. Is there anyway I can more easily replicate the configuration of the VPN from a fail-over load balancing point of view, on the CentOS server? Either that, or can you point me in the right direction as far as what tools Zeroshell uses for the load balancing/bonding/failover, so I can try and replicate it as best I can?

    I take in the interface bonding is done using the bonding module? For load-balancing, I actually only really need the zeroshell device to load-balance traffic leaving the zeroshell device over the 3G links, as most of the traffic will be outbound (with only acknowledgments inbound). In other words, it wouldn’t really matter if traffic from the CentOS server, back to the Zeroshell box went over one link. However fail-over is paramount and the biggest reason for my wanting a solution like this.

    Thanks again for any ideas on the above!

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)