WAN load balancing

Hello
 I have the following issue with a Cisco 2811 router. I have two WAN connection ( fiber and ADSL ) and I want to make WAN load balancing
so I add two route : 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 dialer1 and 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 fa1 the problem is with fiber connection (fa1) in this configuration I can't ping WAN 
from outside or use NAT on this connection. If I change default route's like this it's working but is not WAN load balancing : 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 dialer 150
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 fa1. Any idea.

Hi Richard
I come back with more details:
First I try to setup router with WAN failover like this:
route-map SDM_RMAP_1 permit 1
 match ip address 101
 match interface FastEthernet0/0
route-map SDM_RMAP_2 permit 1
 match ip address 102
 match interface Dialer1
access-list 101 permit ip 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any
access-list 101 permit ip 172.26.60.0 0.0.0.255 any
access-list 102 permit ip 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any
dialer-list 102 protocol ip permit
ip nat inside source route-map SDM_RMAP_1 interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
ip nat inside source route-map SDM_RMAP_2 interface Dialer1 overload
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.0.0.1 25 x.x.x.x 25 route-map SDM_RMAP_1 extendable
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.x 150
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 y.y.y.y track 1 
interface FastEthernet0/0
 ip address x.x.x.x 
 ip nat outside
 ip virtual-reassembly in
 duplex auto
 speed auto
 no cdp enable
 crypto map SDM_CMAP_1
interface FastEthernet0/1
 no ip address
 ip mtu 1492
 ip nat outside
 ip virtual-reassembly in
 duplex auto
 speed auto
 pppoe enable group global
 pppoe-client dial-pool-number 1
interface Dialer1
 ip address negotiated
 ip mtu 1492
 ip nat outside
 ip virtual-reassembly in
 encapsulation ppp
 dialer pool 1
 dialer-group 1
 ppp authentication chap pap callin
 ppp chap hostname ...............
 ppp chap password 7 010109085702121F33434A0014524343
 ppp pap sent-username .......... password 7 0614002D40471D091718160201537E7A
 no cdp enable
 crypto map SDM_CMAP_1
track timer interface 5
track 1 ip sla 1 reachability
 delay down 15 up 10
ip sla 1
 icmp-echo a.b.c.d source-interface y.y.y.y
 timeout 5000
 threshold 40
 frequency 6000
ip sla schedule 1 life forever start-time now
And I want to achive the following results:
All computers from LAN use for internet connection y.y.y.y and if this failed use x.x.x.x and when come back y.y.y.y use this connection.
And I have one server with few services ( DNS, WWW, MAIL...)  which must use just x.x.x.x connection if this failed dosen't matter if this services not working.
But with this configuration one thing not working i can't access from outside Mail server , DNS, WWW  with x.x.x.x connection ( IP ) if I change default route like :
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.x  track 1
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 y.y.y.y  150
it's working

Similar Messages

  • WAN Load-Balancing and multi VLAN design

    Hello,
    I need some help to define the design of a specifi LAN-WAN network.
    1) There are 2 independant WAN entries (they have their own ISP-managed router)
    2) I need to load-balanced the requests over the 2 WAN
    3) If possible, the load-balancer must be redundant (GLBP ?)
    4) On the LAN itself, there must be 15 different VLAN
    5) We also need a DHCP solution (also redundant if possible) to provide IP to these VLAN, with unique gateway (the load-balancer)
    What do I need to implement this configuration ?
    And is it possible to configure with as much GUI as possible ?
    Thanks in advance for your help.

    Dear Mike,
    Thank you and welcome to the Small Business Support Community.
    It is possible to configure load balancing with NAT, however in this case, remote internet servers will potentially see sessions from remote hosts behind the SRP541W coming from different source IP addresses (the WAN IP addresses), causing the sessions to be reset unexpectedly.
    The Policy Routing setting you setup is exactly what I would do in your case.
    I hope these answer your question and please do not hesitate to reach me back if there is anything else I may assist you with.
    Kind regards,
    Jeffrey Rodriguez S. .:|:.:|:.
    Cisco Customer Support Engineer
    *Please rate the Post so other will know when an answer has been found.

  • Cisco RV042 - Dual Wan Load Balancing - Secure Site (HTTPS) Trouble

    PID VID :
    RV042 V03
    Firmware Version :
    v4.0.0.07-tm (Aug 19 2010 19:19:50)
    Ever since I setup my RV042 with load balancing using the Dual Wan system I have had trouble staying connected to some secure sites. After doing some searching I found that the potential issue is the IP change mid session.
    "http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/r25537589-Cisco-RV042-can-not-use-load-balancing-for-some-web-sites"
    Although my interface is significantly different I was able to find the same area in my RV042 admin area however, it doesn't seem to work.
    System Management
    > Dual Wan
    In Wan 1 & Wan 2 I have HTTPS and HTTPS Secondary all forwarded to use Wan 2 under Protocol Binding
    This however has not managed to do anything at all for my network and every computer conneceted experiences the same HTTPS irregularities at some websites.
    I'm sure I must be doing something wrong, but I don't know what it is.
    Both incoming connections are from the same service provider although the plans are different.
    Any help with this would greatly help me stop losing my mind trying to fight with my website control panel for 10 minutes to just login and get something done.
    Thanks

    Any ideas or advice from anyone?

  • New ASA5512- 5515: content filter and WAN load balancing

    Hi,
    it's possible to make the content filter with the new models of asa?
    One of our customers would like to have content filter with the possibiliy to monitor the single client activity (log).
    It' s possible also make the load balancing between 2 WAN?
    Now in HQ they have 2 WAN with WAN backup (ASA5505) and VPN to another site.
    Thanks in advance,
    Paolo.

    I saw that you can add CX feature:
    CX - Context Aware Security Feature:
    Cisco  ASA CX Context-Aware Security is a modular security service that  extends the ASA platform with next-generation capabilities. It is  available with SSD purchase for model such as 5512-X, 5515-X, 5525-X,  55545-X and 5555-X.
    Application Visibility Control (AVC):
    This  is additional feature in CX. Activation of this feature require  seperate license. This is the feature that do deep packet inspection for  Application recognition. provide context-aware firewall security.
    Web Security Essentials (WSE):
    This  is additional feature in CX. Activation of this feature require  seperate license. It deliver features like "URL Filtering" and "Global  Threat Intelligence".
    Can somebody confirm that?
    Have somebody already used and configured this features?
    Thank you,
    Paolo.

  • SRP541W WAN Load Balancing and NAT

    Hello All,
    New to the forums. Thanks for taking the time to read my post. I recently switched my office over from a RV042 to SRP541W. We have 2 DSL lines and have used the Load Balance feature on the RV42 to make the best of the connecton speeds. When setting up the SRP541W when i select load balancing it tells me NAT should be disabled. Why is that? I see a place to input static routes but Im not entirly sure what needs to be done here to set this up correctly. Any input would be appriciated. Also right off the bat we had some issues with access to Google Docs and Mail. I think its becuase those sites dont like seeing access from multiple IPs (fromt the Dual WAN) so I set up a entry in Policy Routing directing all traffic from port 443 to go through one WAN, is this the right way to do this?
    Thanks!
    Mike-

    Dear Mike,
    Thank you and welcome to the Small Business Support Community.
    It is possible to configure load balancing with NAT, however in this case, remote internet servers will potentially see sessions from remote hosts behind the SRP541W coming from different source IP addresses (the WAN IP addresses), causing the sessions to be reset unexpectedly.
    The Policy Routing setting you setup is exactly what I would do in your case.
    I hope these answer your question and please do not hesitate to reach me back if there is anything else I may assist you with.
    Kind regards,
    Jeffrey Rodriguez S. .:|:.:|:.
    Cisco Customer Support Engineer
    *Please rate the Post so other will know when an answer has been found.

  • RV320 - Dual WAN - Load Balance Problem

    Hi all,
    I've just bought a RV320 Dual WAN router an try to get it running. My network setup looks lice the picture attached.
    I have 2 WAN Connections:
    - Router 1 (16Mbit Down / 512kbit up) - no public WAN IP
    - Router 2 (3 Mbit Down / 512kbit up) - Fixed public IP
    Router 1 ist connected to WAN1 and router 2 to WAN2 port on the RV320.
    I have enabled load balancing mode.
    Qustions:
    1.
    I want WAN1 to be the primary line to be used until capacity reached.
    Currently for some reason I don't understand the cisco always uses WAN2.
    That's not good as all browsing and downloading is limited to 3mbit.
    When I switch to "fail-over" mode and set primry live to WAN1 that works, but WAN2 is not kept alive.
    2.
    I am using VOIP and need to route all VOIP traffic to WAN2 interface.
    The best would be to tell the router IP 192.168.177.9 (voip phone) should use WAN2. So far I didn't figure out how to do that.
    Can I put VOIP into one VLAN group and allocated VLAN to one specific WAN interface?
    Brgds

    So, you can hear the phone ringing and answer it? which means that SIP pakets are coming through WAN to LAN and well redirected to the phone IP, but you cannot hear after that, which means that there could be a problem with the RTP packets. 
    If you have problem only with the incoming calls and not the outgoing, than try enable/disable SIP ALG (Firewall). If that doesn't fix the issue, try to allow (or even forward) from WAN to LAN RDP -  UDP ports 16384-32767 to the phone IP.
    Regards,
    Kremena

  • WAN load balancing question

    Hello All,
    I need some help on below.
    - ISP-1 provided two routers (R1 and R2), each router connect to a different internet circuit (ISP-1 and ISP-2 circuits)
    - Locally have a customer router (R3)
    - Locally have a public DMZ (203.xxx.xxx.xxx/24)
    Requirement:-
    1. Incoming/Outgoing traffics to/from DMZ should via both circuits equally (Load Balance)
    2. R3 need to know where to route to internet
    3. When there is outage on either internet circuit, no outage should occur. All traffics will route on the working circuit
    Attach diagram what i think it will work base on the requirement. But i am not sure how the actual router configuraiton should look likes.
    If it will not work base on the diagram, please help advice how can it be done.
    Appreciate your time.
    Regards,
    Christopher

    Hello All,
    I need some help on below.
    - ISP-1 provided two routers (R1 and R2), each router connect to a different internet circuit (ISP-1 and ISP-2 circuits)
    - Locally have a customer router (R3)
    - Locally have a public DMZ (203.xxx.xxx.xxx/24)
    Requirement:-
    1. Incoming/Outgoing traffics to/from DMZ should via both circuits equally (Load Balance)
    2. R3 need to know where to route to internet
    3. When there is outage on either internet circuit, no outage should occur. All traffics will route on the working circuit
    Attach diagram what i think it will work base on the requirement. But i am not sure how the actual router configuraiton should look likes.
    If it will not work base on the diagram, please help advice how can it be done.
    Appreciate your time.
    Regards,
    Christopher

  • Multiple wan load balancer

    Hi team,
    I have 4 ISP connected to a router when one ISP goes down I need to manually change to another ISP 
    Is there any utm box which support auto load balancer 

    I am also looking for the solutions for this problem. You got any solution then Please share with us.
    Regards
    Abhishek

  • Load balancing weirdness using NAT and same-metric route

    Hi.
    I'm trying to set up a double-WAN load-balancing scenario:
    I decided to attempt the "multiple same-metric routes with NAT" approach so I went for the example used in the IOS NAT Load-Balancing for Two ISP Connections Configuration Guide [1].
    I decided to use an upside-down Cisco 871-SEC/K9: use Vlan1 and Vlan2 for the routers and Fa4 for the LAN. I am hoping this is not an issue.
    There is this weirdness with some connections, particularly FTP. I pinpointed the problem to the following scenario: if I do a couple of pings to 100.1.1.1 using the FastEthernet4 as the source address, this is what I get in the logs:
    === PING 1 ECHO REQUEST ===
    *Mar 3 04:38:43.521: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), routed via RIB
    *Mar 3 04:38:43.521: NAT: s=192.168.60.4->10.129.124.2, d=100.1.1.1 [14152]
    *Mar 3 04:38:43.521: IP: s=10.129.124.2 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), g=10.129.124.1, len 60, forward
    *Mar 3 04:38:43.521: ICMP type=8, code=0
    === PING 1 ECHO REPLY ===
    *Mar 3 04:38:45.589: NAT*: s=100.1.1.1, d=10.129.124.2->192.168.60.4 [19824]
    *Mar 3 04:38:45.589: IP: tableid=0, s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), routed via RIB
    *Mar 3 04:38:45.589: IP: s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), g=192.168.60.4, len 60, forward
    *Mar 3 04:38:45.589: ICMP type=0, code=0
    === (something else) ===
    *Mar 3 04:38:52.353: RT: SET_LAST_RDB for 0.0.0.0/0
    OLD rdb: via 10.129.124.33, Vlan2
    NEW rdb: via 10.129.124.1, Vlan1
    === PING 2 ECHO REQUEST ===
    *Mar 3 04:38:52.353: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan2), routed via RIB
    *Mar 3 04:38:52.353: NAT: s=192.168.60.4->10.129.124.2, d=100.1.1.1 [14159]
    *Mar 3 04:38:52.353: IP: s=10.129.124.2 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan2), g=10.129.124.33, len 60, forward
    *Mar 3 04:38:52.353: ICMP type=8, code=0
    === PING 2 ECHO REPLY ===
    *Mar 3 04:38:53.029: NAT*: s=100.1.1.1, d=10.129.124.2->192.168.60.4 [19825]
    *Mar 3 04:38:53.029: IP: tableid=0, s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), routed via RIB
    *Mar 3 04:38:53.033: IP: s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), g=192.168.60.4, len 60, forward
    *Mar 3 04:38:53.033: ICMP type=0, code=0
    In the section "Ping 2 Echo Request" line 2 shows the NAT translating the packet to the address for the first provider but line 3 shows it routing it through the second one.
    In this case, the ICMP packet goes through but it is problematic if the ISP restricts the service by source-address (like RPF) or there is some acceleration mechanism inside the provider cloud, other than just plain routing.
    What am I missing? Here is the relevant part of the configuration. I deliberately disabled CEF to be able to debug the messages, but I *think* this may be altering the actual router behavior. This router does not have a "debug ip cef packet" command.
    no ip cef
    ip dhcp pool lan-side
    import all
    network 192.168.60.0 255.255.255.0
    default-router 192.168.60.1
    domain-name doublewan.local
    dns-server 8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4
    lease infinite
    ip domain name doublewan
    interface FastEthernet0
    !doesn't appear on running-config: vlan 1 is the default access vlan
    !switchport access vlan 1
    interface FastEthernet1
    switchport access vlan 2
    interface FastEthernet2
    shutdown
    interface FastEthernet3
    shutdown
    interface FastEthernet4
    ip address 192.168.60.1 255.255.255.0
    ip nat inside
    ip virtual-reassembly
    no ip route-cache
    duplex auto
    speed auto
    interface Vlan1
    ip address 10.129.124.2 255.255.255.224
    ip nat outside
    ip virtual-reassembly
    no ip route-cache
    interface Vlan2
    ip address 10.129.124.35 255.255.255.224
    ip nat outside
    ip virtual-reassembly
    no ip route-cache
    ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Vlan1 10.129.124.1
    ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Vlan2 10.129.124.33
    ip nat inside source route-map nat1 interface Vlan1 overload
    ip nat inside source route-map nat2 interface Vlan2 overload
    ip access-list standard acl4-nexthop-vlan1
    permit 10.129.124.1
    ip access-list standard acl4-nexthop-vlan2
    permit 10.129.124.33
    route-map nat2 permit 10
    match ip address 102
    match ip next-hop acl4-nexthop-vlan2
    match interface Vlan2
    route-map nat1 permit 10
    match ip address 101
    match ip next-hop acl4-nexthop-vlan1
    match interface Vlan1
    control-plane
    Of course, there is some configuration pending for redundancy and stuff.
    Thanks a lot in advance.
    [1] http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/network-address-translation-nat/100658-ios-nat-load-balancing-2isp.html

    Hello.
    This might be a bug in debug command or the IOS (without ip cef) you use; as routing is done before NAT (inside to outside).
    To make sure it works fine with ip cef, just enable strict uRPF (or just ACL) on .1 and .33 interfaces and see if you see any packet sent over wrong interface.
    PS: please check "sh ip cef 100.1.1.1"; I guess ip cef would tell you "per-destination sharing".

  • Multihomed eBGP load balancing with 3 ISP's

    We currently peer with 2 ISPs using BGP in an active/failover configuration.  My company wants to move to a 3 ISP model where Internet traffic is split across the 3 providers so that bandwidth is equally distributed on outgoing traffic across our 2 /22 ARIN IP ranges.  This is from our 2 edge switches that have VSS.  
    Within my limited knowledge of BGP, I have determined that we could do load sharing pretty easily by adding multiple default routes and breaking up our /22's into /24 and advertising them that way.  However, I don't think this satisfies the request that downtime must be seamless, should one link drop.  
    Currently, our ISP's advertise default routes.  From the research that I've done, we could get close to load balanced links if we receive full BGP routes and community settings and definitions.  I'm nervous about this because it looks really complicated, and I don't want our AS to turn into a transit AS.  I've been told the same can be accomplished with only partial BGP routes and community settings and definitions.  
    Personally, I think we just need a WAN load balancer.  However, given the request, is there a thread out there that can explain this, or can someone discuss this requested scenario a little bit?  
    Thanks!

    Hi there
    First question would be what is the required reconvergence time for the applications using the Internet? Should an outage occur, when do they lose their state? Once you know that, you then have a target to aim for in terms of recovery
    With regards load-balancing, with BGP we are always talking inbound and outbound.
    The outbound solution is relatively simple - each ISP advertises a default route to your Internet edge router(s). Create an eBGP session from each edge router to the core, advertise the default route and redistribute into the IGP. Ensure the IGP cost to each BGP next hop is equal and you have ECMP for outbound routing.
    Inbound influence is usually via MED (not likely in this case given 3 ISPs), adjusting local-pref in the ISP via BGP EXT communities configured your end, or via AS-PATH prepending for longer prefixes from your /22. Prepending would be simplest, but your unlikely to get an exact inbound traffic split, however a relatively even distribution should be sufficient. 

  • Load balancing effect on ssh/https connections

    We have a RV016 load balancing between two broadband WAN connections. On protocols that are sensitive to a change in IP address such as ssh and https, if the client connection goes inactive for a short time (sometimes as short as 10 seconds), the RV016 often changes WAN connection as part of its "load balancing" feature. Most protocols do not even notice, but the more sensitive protocols do and often lock a session or timeout the session which is not a good thing.
    We have been able to bind these sensitive protcolols to a particular WAN port but (in our minds) this is not an "ideal" situation. In fact I would consider this to be a broken "load balancing" solution and should be fixed.
    Does anyone have any "permanent fixes" or ideas on this?
    Thanks!

    Sorry Tom, but I wrote (edited for clarity): "What would happen [..] when the particular WAN chosen goes down? Does the system apply the same binding to ***another WAN*** until the original one comes back up, will it ignore the bining and so break any new sessions of the same protocol or will it simply fail (no connection)?"
    I did not write "the other WAN". That is, I am considering the case, quite common, of more than two WANs.
    Proper load balancing is described here:
    http://help.mysonicwall.com/sw/eng/305/ui2/23100/Network/WAN_Failover_Load_Balancing.htm
    "About Source and Destination IP Address Binding
    When you establish a connection with a WAN, you can create multiple interfaces, dividing up the task load over these interfaces. There are both Primary and Secondary WAN interfaces. This task distribution model maintains high performance, ensuring that one interface does not become an impasse to the point where it blocks traffic from passing. This process is WAN Load Balancing.
    While WAN Load Balancing addresses performance challenges, it can create other problems, including losing track of sessions. Session confusion can occur because some applications fail to adequately track multiple user sessions load-balanced on multiple interfaces. These applications treat incoming packets as originating from different users because they use IP addresses to differentiate user sessions instead of application-layer user identification tags.
    To ensure that you have proper connectivity in all applications, SonicWALL provides a feature called Source and Destination IP Addresses Binding, a solution that maintains a consistent mapping of traffic flows with a single outbound WAN interface."
    and their appliances are no more expensive than Cisco multi WAN ones...

  • LRT224 Load Balance "dumb" DHCP router setup... HELP!

    Hi
    I'm trying to set up a LRT224 with two ADSL modems connected to one network with load balancing.
    I'm not going to use vlan or vpn at all. 
    All I need it to do is be a "dumb" router that combines the speed of both Internet connections.
    Working mode is set to Router
    LAN 192.168.0.1/255.255.255.0 (I changed the LAN ip range)
    WAN 1 and 2 gets IP, default gateway and DNS trough DHCP from the modems.
    Wan 1: IP 192.168.1.65 Gateway 192.168.1.1 DNS 192.168.1.1
    Wan 2: IP 192.168.2.38 Gateway 192.168.2.1 DNS 192.168.2.1
    DHCP setup:
    Device IP: 192.168.0.1
    Subnet: 255.255.255.0
    DHCP Server
    Range 192.168.0.50/254
    DNS: Use DNS from ISP
    Dual Wan:
    Load Balance
    I'm no IT expert at but I have set up a few routers before that was close to "plug and play"
    My problem is that connected computers indicate that they are connected to Internet, but I'm not able to access any websites.
    When trying to use windows troubleshooter it indicates that there is a DNS problem.
    I'm not even able to connect to the modems.
    Installed latest firmware and done a fabric restore.
    Network is built as follows (still working as I'm not running anything trough the lrt224 before I can get it to work)
    ADSL Modem with built in DHCP and Switch --> Switch --> Ubiquiti Unifi AP --> User
    Some of the AP's is connected via Ubiquiti NanoStation (wireless bridge between 4 houses, works great)
    Any idea how to get this to work or do I have the wrong router? 

    I recommend:
    Modem1 (192.168.1.1)=> LRT WAN1 (192.168.1.254)
    Modem2 (10.10.10.1) => LRT WAN2 (10.10.10.254)
    LRT WAN1 SN (255.255.255.0)
    LRT WAN2 SN (255.255.255.0)
    LRT WAN1 GW (192.168.1.1)
    LRT WAN2 GW (10.10.10.1)
    LRT WAN1 DNS (192.168.1.1)
    LRT WAN2 DNS (10.10.10.1)
    System Management => Load Balance
    LRT DHCP Device IP (192.168.200.1)
    LRT LAN => Switch => Ubiquiti Unifi AP => User
    Nothing other than the LRT's connected to the modems.
    If the modems DHCP is set to 192.168.1.x and 10.10.10.x subnet 255.255.255.0 then DHCP setting will work on the LRT WANs.
    Please remember to Kudo those that help you.
    Linksys
    Communities Technical Support

  • WAN round-robin load balancing

    First things first, I just recently got that horrible distribution Gentoo off my machine and installed Arch for a test run and so far a flipping love it. Just like to thank everyone that made this wonderful piece of Linux.
    To the point: I have a box with 3 NIC and it current runs as my LAN gateway. http://pastie.org/608016 is the script I use to do so and as you may have guessed eth0 is my DSL modem eth1 is my LAN switch, eth2 is my cable modem. Currently my LAN runs off just my DSL, if I want to change this and run off the cable I have to change WAN in the script to eth2 and run it. I would like to change this and have it round-robin load balance over my DSL, cable.
    I tried
    ifconfig eth0 down
    ifconfig eth2 down
    modprobe bonding mode=0 miimon=100
    ifconfig bond0 10.0.0.5
    ifenslave bond0 eth0
    ifenslave bond0 eth2
    inspired by http://ubuntulinuxhelp.com/how-to-use-t … -computer/ and that didn't work at all.
    Then I had a look at http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Con … rk#bonding (two ip on two card) but that didn't really make sense to be as you're not specifying what interfaces to bond anywhere.
    Could anyone help me?

    Let us first set some symbolical names. Let $IF1 be the name of the first interface (if1 in the picture above) and $IF2 the name of the second interface. Then let $IP1 be the IP address associated with $IF1 and $IP2 the IP address associated with $IF2. Next, let $P1 be the IP address of the gateway at Provider 1, and $P2 the IP address of the gateway at provider 2. Finally, let $P1_NET be the IP network $P1 is in, and $P2_NET the IP network $P2 is in.
    One creates two additional routing tables, say T1 and T2. These are added in /etc/iproute2/rt_tables. Then you set up routing in these tables as follows:
    ip route add $P1_NET dev $IF1 src $IP1 table T1
    ip route add default via $P1 table T1
    ip route add $P2_NET dev $IF2 src $IP2 table T2
    ip route add default via $P2 table T2
    What does it mean by 'IP network' ($P*_NET)?

  • Load balancing over two separate outside routers and two separate WAN Links

    Hi everybody,
    I have one 2851 setup with two separate ISP links and have it configured for failover with BGP.  It works great but doesn't load balance.
    Well now I have to new routers (3925's) to replace the single 2851 and I want to configure them to load balance over separate WAN links.
    Can someone help figure out the best approach to make this happen?  I would really appreciate it.
    Thank you,
    Thomas Reiling

    Disclaimer
    The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
    Liability Disclaimer
    In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
    Posting
    The "best approach", IMO, would be to use PfR (if your routers support it).

  • Default WAN in RV042 Load Balancing

    If I choose the RV042 mode as load balancer and bind some protocol to specific WANs, what will happen to the protocols that I didn't bind to any specific WAN? will they go to WAN1 by default?
    Thanks

    Hi,
    When Load Balance is enabled, RV042 will dispatch (using weighted Round Robin) incoming sessions to WAN1 and WAN2 according to the ratio of the WAN bandwidth. A session is defined by a TCP connection or a UDP stream with certain timeout.
    I found this in the users guide.   
    *  Dual WAN. There are two functions provided for users – Smart Link Backup and Load Balance..
    *  If Smart Link Backup is selected, you only need to choose which WAN port is the primary and then the other will be the backup. See Figure 6-22. 
    *  If Load Balance is selected, there will be two main choices:
    •    By Traffic – Intelligent Balancer (Auto) and user defined. See Figure 6-23.  First, choose the Max. Bandwidth of Upstream (64K/128K/256K/384K/512K/1024K/1.5M/2M/2.5M or above) and Downstream (512K/1024K/1.5M/2M/2.5M or above) for WAN1 and WAN2, as provided by your ISP.
    •    Intelligent Balancer (Auto): When choosing Intelligent Balancer, it will automatically compute the maximum bandwidth of WAN1 and WAN2 by using Weighted Round Robin to balance the loading. If (upstream / downstream / upstream or downstream) bandwidth is excessive (30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%), bring up the second link.  When there is an inactivity time-out (None/10min/20min/30min/40min/50min/60min), the second link will be terminated.
    Adding to this is the operation of Network Service Detection (NSD), which allows RV042 to ping the liveliness of the default gateway of the WAN port or a specified Host. The retry timeout and retry count will affect how long RV042 determines the WAN is down. By default the detection time is
    (Retry timeout) + (Retry count) * (5 sec)  // the 5 sec is hard coded (which is about 1 minute)

Maybe you are looking for

  • Transfer everything from old iPod to new iPod

    I have an 80g iPod classic. I'm looking to buy a touch soon and I wanted to know if there is a way to tranfser everything from my classic to the new touch. also, i dont buy my music from itunes, i get it from limewire and i deleted all of the music o

  • How do I downgrade to iMovie '06?

    How do I downgrade to iMovie '06?  I have '11 but would like the effects from '06?  I cannot download it from any of the available links.

  • Process Order - IDOC processing

    Dear All, I am using RCCLORD program (submitted from a custom program) to send LOIPRO IDOC to an external system. It is working wonderful. Only probelm is when the order status is set "Deletion" (status DLFL), I am not getting the IDOC. My requiremen

  • Editing 'Media Kind' for more than one song.

    Team, After downloading the newest update, I am no longer permitted to edit the "Media Kind" for more than one item at a time.  I need to be able to select an entire album at a time in order to efficiently update my library.  I sincerely appreciate y

  • Video preview not showing?

    When I try to preview a movie on my laptop, the screen comes up and it is just black - it's not showing the preview. Are there any settings I need to change?