Wireless Bridge Load Balancing

Is it possible to configure two 1300 series bridges at one location, each handling a bridge link to another location to BOTH backup and load balance for each other should one of them fail?

Hi,
You can achieve this with quiet a few options -
1) Routing - You can configure the two routes with same AD to achieve Load Balancing and failover. Care should be taken be cause connectivity between router and bridge would be ethernet and if the radio link fails router would never come to know about this failure and will keep sending the traffic on the failed link. Usee SAA probes with ICMP to track the link failure.
2) You can configure etherchannel between two switches and achieve load balancing + failover.
>> Sushil

Similar Messages

Wireless clients load balancing on the APs on WLC 4404

Hi Experts,
I'm just wondering if the WLC 4404 with firmware 4.2.207.0 can load balance the wireless clients on different WAPs. Let's say that an AP is already handling 15 Wireless devices. When the 16th is trying to join, the controller somehow puts it on another nearby AP, even the signal from this AP is weaker. I heard the similar feature on other Wireless solution vendors. I'm just wondering if Cisco has the similar feature or not.
Thanks!

Yes it is known as aggressive load balancing sending a code 17 making the wireless client to loook at another nearby AP.
here it is the documentation:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6366/products_tech_note09186a00809c2fc3.shtml

Two Wireless controllers load balance and failover question

I have two 4404 controllers and each can take 100 APs. I have 140 APs in total. With the default settings (no master controller, no configuration of Prime, secondary controller on APs), each controller will take 70 APs, right?
Then I will need to configure each AP with an IP address, name ...etc. My question is, when one Controller failed, these 70 APs will try to associate with another controller, right? However only 30 APs can because another controller can maximum manage 100 APs. Then in this case, will these 30 APs lose their static IP addresses and names? When the failed controller came back online, will the 70 APs automatically go back to this controller and have their IP, name configuration back?
Thanks!

With default setting you have no control how many ap's go to what wlc. It doesn't matter, because you will need to specify the primary and secondary. You might as well stage all the ap's you want on one wlc first and set that wlc to master, then when you have finished that, set the other wlc to master and have the ap's join that wlc which will be the primary fro those ap's.
You only can support 100 ap's so depending what code you use, 30 ap's that are not able to join will just keep trying. If you run 5.2 (I think is buggy) you can set the priority on the ap's so that ap's that you set up with a higher priority will be able to join and the others will again sit there until the othe wlc comes back up. Static IP address will not dissapear because the wlc doesnt' accept any more connections. Once both wlc are up, the ap's will go back to their primary wlc as long as ap fallback is enabled and mobility is configured right.

Load Balancing - Wireless

Hi
If I'm reading correctly Load Balancing is not advisable if using voice of wifi.
On a conroler with 70.220 - Wireless - Advanced - Load balancing
Load balancing - client windows is default 5, max denial 3
But on the wlan, the load balancing isn't enabled..
Which one is the master setting?
We're boardcasting several SSIDs, one of them is a guest SSID, which is open, so we get the Apple devices autmaticaly associating to them.
So if we dont set the load balancing on each wlan, this means there is a msximum of 5 devices to 1 AP, doesn't matter which wlan it's on?
Is there a best practice guide for load balancing?
Clarrifaction would be great
Cheers
Craig

Craig,
Do not use load balancing for latency-sensitive WLANs, especially voice WLANs. Rejecting voice clients extends their roaming delay and can drop calls.
The setting on the WLAN Advanced tab determines whether or not clients associating to that WLAN will be denied if the load balancing algorithm determines the AP to which the client wants to associate is too loaded (determined by the global LB settings). If you have the box unchecked, then LB is not in effect for that WLAN and clients on that WLAN will never be rejected.
The load balancing algorithm is run against clients for an AP. The count of clients is cumulative for all WLANs, i.e., the load balancing numbers are not set and comared on a per-WLAN basis. This wouldn't make a lot of sense as the LB algorithm is attempting to keep clients physically spread across infrastructure radio resources, regardless of whether you have 1 WLAN or 5 WLANs active on the radio.
I don't know of a best practices guidefor load balancing other than don't use it on WLANs that have low-latency applications such as voice or live-streaming (unbuffered) video. The controller configuration guide is a good place to start and does a pretty good job of explaining how it works.
One other thing I would recommend is to make the algorithm less aggressive. I think max 3 denials is too high and would drop to 1 or 2. I'd also open up the LB window size to about 8 or 10 instead of the default 5.
I think some folks on the forums here have found some issues with LB, although I haven't run into too many so far. I think the AP sends a message type 17 and some clients have trouble processing it (or something like that). You might want to search the forums here and check the bug toolkit to see if there's anything that comes up.
Justin

WLC Load Balancing Threshold

I am trying to understand how the load balancing threshold is calculated but I am finding conflicting information, even withing Cisco's own documentation. I would be grateful if anyone could help.
Cisco's latest Wireless LAN Controller Configuration Guide for software release 7.0.116.0 (April 2011) contains the following information for configuring Wireless > Advanced > Load Balancing Page (emphasis mine):
In the Client Window Size text box, enter a value between 1 and 20. The window size becomes part of the algorithm that determines whether an access point is too heavily loaded to accept more client associations:
load-balancing window + client associations on AP with highest load = load-balancing threshold
In the group of access points accessible to a client device, each access point has a different number of client associations. The access point with the lowest number of clients has the lightest load. The client window size plus the number of clients on the access point with the lightest load forms the threshold. Access points with more client associations than this threshold is considered busy, and clients can associate only to access points with client counts lower than the threshold.
Option 1
The formula shown is correct (load-balancing window + client associations on AP with highest load = load-balancing threshold). If so, this would mean that if you had a window size of 5 and the AP with the highest load at the time of calculation was 15, the threshold would be 18. However, as no APs have 18 associations then this threshold would never be reached. Even if an AP reach 18 associations, the next client trying to associate would trigger another calculation for the threshold which would be 21 (3 + 18) and so still, this threshold would never be hit.
Option 2
The description in the paragraph below is correct (The access point with the lowest number of clients has the lightest load. The client window size plus the number of clients on the access point with the lightest load forms the threshold). This sounds much more sensible to me. In this case, the window size was 3 and the AP with the lowest number of associations already had 7 clients associated, the load balancing threshold would be 10 i.e. no load balancing would occur until a client tried to associate with an AP which already had at least 10 clients associated.
Option 3
I have seen many descriptions on forums etc of the load balancing threshold being essentially the Client window size, i.e. if the client window size is 3 then load balancing will kick in when a client tries to associate to an AP with at least 3 clients already associated. This doesnt match the above documentation unless the AP with the least number of clients associated doesnt have any associated clients i.e. 0 clients.
Questions
I think Option 2 is the correct description of load balancing and the formula given stating use of the AP with the highest load is a typo (albeit still not corrected in the latest documentation). Am I correct?
The problem with using the option 2 method of calculating the load threshold is that you will be unnecessarily performing load balancing in an environment where some of your APs do actually have zero clients associated, unless you set the window size to somehing close to 10.
I read here http://www.perihel.at/wlan/wlan-wlc.html#aggressive-load-balancing that when calculating the load threshold, it only accounts for the 8 'best' APs for a given client. In other words, if you have 60 APs on your campus but only 20 are visible to the client, the controller will only perform its load threshold calculations bases on the 8 APs which have the best signal to the client. This would ,ake sense as there is no point setting a load threshold based on the lightest loaded AP which is not even within 'reach' of the client. Is this correct as I can not find any other documentation which supports this?
Thanks in advance for your help with this.

Interesting, the config guide contradicts itself in the same paragraph.....    I thought maybe we had two different documents with different explanations. I don't see any open documentation bugs asking to correct this, but I swear I've heard discussion on this in the past.......
First off: Option #3 was the "old way". I think it changed in 6.0.    If you had a threshold of 5, then as soon as you had 5 clients on an AP it would reject the association (3 times and then let them on the 4th attempt). Now its a sliding window/scale.
Option #1 I think is completely wrong. As you described, how in the world would you ever surpass the threshold if the highest AP + the window is what you have to beat to load-balance....?    RIght, that just doesn't make any sense to me.....
Option #2, the way you explain it is correct to my understanding...
Your question #3 is also correct (not sure if it is Top 8 or based on an RSSI threshold though.)
The idea is that you don't want some AP in a remote office with 0 clients being your starting point.   So I believe that it is based on the top X candidate for your client.    If your client has 4 viable candidates (lets just say -70 or better), and one of those APs has 5 clients and the rest have 15, I'd expect loadbalancing to try to get you to the 5 client AP if your window size was ~10...... something like that anyhow...

WLC 7.5.102.0 Client Load Balancing

Hi,
Regarding 'Client Load Balancing' feature in WLC code 7.5.102.0, which one will take precedence:
- Load Balancing enabled in RF Profile and applied in an AP Group.
- Load Balancing enabled in WLAN
Also, is there any way to determine the statistics of the Load Balancing in RF Profile? (similar to the Statistics for Client Load Balancing enabled per WLAN in Wireless> Advanced > Load Balancing > Load Balancing Statistics)
Thanks in advance!
- edison

RF Profiles overrides any global settings, just like AP Groups can override the vlan or interface mappings.
say for example, I want to leverage the RF Profile for highly dense deploytment (like Town Hall or influx of users) and as result i want to deploy more temp APs that will coexist my existing APs. I just want to modify the High Density parameter - limiting the max clients only. but the RF Profile comes with the Load Balancing too and i don't think it cannot be disabled separately.
> Load balacing is enabled on the WLAN and isn't in the RF Profile. High Desnity, you create a RF Profile to disable the lower data rates, maybe 54 and 36 as mandatory and 24 and or 48 supported... depends on how much you want to shrink your cells. Also setting the max and min TX power.... no need for load balancing if you shrink the cells down.
so when i apply the RF Profile to the AP Group, the profile's Load Balancing settings will also be applied together with my preferred High Density settings - while my WLAN settting is not enabled with Load Balancing.
> No.... you either enable load balancing on the WLAN or not. The screen shot I showed you is a threshold configuration if its enabled.
Thanks,
Scott
*****Help out other by using the rating system and marking answered questions as "Answered"*****

Dual wireless/ Load Balancing/ Link Aggregation

Hi all,
I've been reading up on this topic all day, with multiple Google and Apple searches, but haven't found the exact answer to this query. There was another post on this forum http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1660762 which was vaguely similar.
Basically I'm looking to experiment with combining 2 wireless connections, and therefore 2 seperate internet connections into one Mac.
I have seen suggestions of using a couple of wireless -> ethernet bridges, since Leopard supports Link Aggregation of ethernet devices. But the first question I have is: since I use a 3rd party wireless adaptor (Netgear wg111v3 USB dongle), it already shows up in Network Preferences as an Ethernet port. Leopard treats it as an actual ethernet device, hence is oblivious to the fact it is a wireless adaptor. Since Leopard thinks it's an ethernet port, could I use a second wireless dongle and then use Link Aggregation on them both?
Additionally, if that idea were to work, would it then be possible to connect each wireless adaptor to a seperate wireless network, or would they both have to connect to the same access point?
My DSL connection is roughly 512k on a good day, but I find this bandwidth to be choked when someone else at home is streaming videos etc. So in principle my idea was to have one connection using the regular DSL line as usual, plus connect the secondary wireless to my friend's wireless over the road when needed (and yes he's already agreed to my use since he rarely accesses the net). Therefore, giving a total theoretical bandwidth of 512k x2.
Since I aim for a load-balancing idea (spreading traffic over both connections), the main issue I can forsee is that this Mac will have problems routing traffic with both IPs since I read somewhere else that DNS problems might occur.It seems relatively easy to use Terminal to add a default route for specific destinations (e.g. all traffic to apple.com out of one interface, all traffic to yahoo.com out the other). However, I wondered if web traffic could be forwarded out one connection, whilst email traffic goes through the other. Alternatively, it would be great if web traffic could be "halved" and sent out both wireless connections simultaneously, though I don't think there's an easy way to do this (it would just be a nice feature if possible).
Your thoughts and advice on the matter would be much appreciated, and I'm going to continue experimenting with various ideas and see what I come up with.

Hi all,
I've been reading up on this topic all day, with multiple Google and Apple searches, but haven't found the exact answer to this query. There was another post on this forum http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1660762 which was vaguely similar.
Basically I'm looking to experiment with combining 2 wireless connections, and therefore 2 seperate internet connections into one Mac.
I have seen suggestions of using a couple of wireless -> ethernet bridges, since Leopard supports Link Aggregation of ethernet devices. But the first question I have is: since I use a 3rd party wireless adaptor (Netgear wg111v3 USB dongle), it already shows up in Network Preferences as an Ethernet port. Leopard treats it as an actual ethernet device, hence is oblivious to the fact it is a wireless adaptor. Since Leopard thinks it's an ethernet port, could I use a second wireless dongle and then use Link Aggregation on them both?
Additionally, if that idea were to work, would it then be possible to connect each wireless adaptor to a seperate wireless network, or would they both have to connect to the same access point?
My DSL connection is roughly 512k on a good day, but I find this bandwidth to be choked when someone else at home is streaming videos etc. So in principle my idea was to have one connection using the regular DSL line as usual, plus connect the secondary wireless to my friend's wireless over the road when needed (and yes he's already agreed to my use since he rarely accesses the net). Therefore, giving a total theoretical bandwidth of 512k x2.
Since I aim for a load-balancing idea (spreading traffic over both connections), the main issue I can forsee is that this Mac will have problems routing traffic with both IPs since I read somewhere else that DNS problems might occur.It seems relatively easy to use Terminal to add a default route for specific destinations (e.g. all traffic to apple.com out of one interface, all traffic to yahoo.com out the other). However, I wondered if web traffic could be forwarded out one connection, whilst email traffic goes through the other. Alternatively, it would be great if web traffic could be "halved" and sent out both wireless connections simultaneously, though I don't think there's an easy way to do this (it would just be a nice feature if possible).
Your thoughts and advice on the matter would be much appreciated, and I'm going to continue experimenting with various ideas and see what I come up with.

Unequal Load Balancing with EIGRP over 4 Wireless networks

We are trying to load-balance on 4 interfaces that have unequal bandwidths. The setup looks like this
8 Computers -> Empty Config Switch -> 3560 Router\Switch -> 4x Wireless Radios on different frequencies - networks -> 3560 Router\Switch->Empty Config Switch -> 8 Computers
We have EIGRP setup and the bandwidths defined, and the routes are showing proper share counts, but once we start adding traffic to the network, they all jump on one of the links. The config and everything looks right, its just not working. I have tried switching to different cef algorithms. Removed the vlans . I made them equal cost and they did the same thing. Its like EIGRP does not want to load balance.
When i did this config with static routes or as OSPF, it actually load balanced them, but I'm stuck with a 1:1 share ratio. If i could control the ratio, then that would be an acceptable solution.
Any ideas on what could be causing this?
Code:
Routing entry for 192.168.104.0/24
Known via "eigrp 10", distance 90, metric 13312, type internal
Redistributing via eigrp 10
Last update from 192.168.2.4 on Vlan2, 00:04:25 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 192.168.9.4, from 192.168.9.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan9
      Route metric is 51712, traffic share count is 31
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 50000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.5.4, from 192.168.5.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan5
      Route metric is 13312, traffic share count is 120
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 200000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.3.4, from 192.168.3.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan3
      Route metric is 26112, traffic share count is 61
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.2.4, from 192.168.2.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan2
      Route metric is 13312, traffic share count is 120
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 200000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/1 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/2 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/3 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 17111000 bits/sec, 2545 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 13872000 bits/sec, 2251 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/4 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show ip cef exact-route 192.168.101.57 192.168.104.57
192.168.101.57 -> 192.168.104.57 => IP adj out of Vlan5, addr 192.168.5.4
Here is the config.
Code:
ip cef load-sharing algorithm universal 00123456
interface FastEthernet0/1
switchport access vlan 2
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/2
switchport access vlan 3
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/3
switchport access vlan 5
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/4
switchport access vlan 9
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description USER PORT
switchport access vlan 100
spanning-tree portfast
interface Vlan2
bandwidth 200000
ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan3
bandwidth 100000
ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan5
bandwidth 200000
ip address 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan9
bandwidth 50000
ip address 192.168.9.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan100
description User Data
ip address 192.168.101.1 255.255.255.0
router eigrp 10
maximum-paths 8
variance 15
network 192.168.2.0
network 192.168.3.0
network 192.168.5.0
network 192.168.9.0
network 192.168.101.0

Yup, that was the first cef algorithm I had tried.   ip cef load-sharing algorithm include-ports source destination
I tried all of the different types.
Also, I was sending data trough iperf from 4 computers + 1 comp steaming video on one network to 5 computers on another network. In any case of source or destination, it should have switched over. The odds of it all going on Vlan 5 is ~ 0.6%   Restarting the router sometimes places it all on a different vlan, but in any case its all or nothing.

How to load SW in 1310 wireless bridge when flash has no SW-image

During an upgrade (autonomous software), I indicated that the system should create enough room to load the new software.
However, while loading the new software, the system crashed, so no image at all is left in flash.
How can I load a software image in the wireless bridge ?
In old days with routers this was possible with some x-protocol over the console connection.
Is there any description on how to handle this on a wireless bridge.
I always end up in the boot mode.
Thanks

If the device doesnt have an image, type reset on the boot console, When it comes up , if will ask for certain options
set IP_ADDR
set NETMASK
set DEFAULT_ROUTER
set IP_ADDR
set NETMASK
set DEFAULT_ROUTER
Make sure the value (IP_ADDR, NETMASK .. ) are copied exactly, other wise it will not work, Once you have copied, if you type set, you can seet these values.
After this type the following commands
tftp_init
ether_init
flash_init
and then
tar -xtract tftp:/// flash:
and boot
Thanks
NikhiL

Firewall Load Balance using bridged mode ACE

Dear Folks,
I 'd like to load balance 2 ASA using 3 ACE [ Inside,outside,dmz network zone]
I 've seen sample configuration, all of them are running the ACE in the route mode, and asa are running in route mode
Would it be possible to run the ACE in the bridge Mode, because the ip subneted problem, We don't have enough to split,,
by the way if possible,All server that install behind ACE, what is default gateway should Server Point to [ in our case we have 2 independent firewall ] should I create the VIP for both firewall ? or should I just simply set the server's gateway to BVI interface, ?
Please Help Thanks

Thank you very much Gilles,
You 're the man. ;-)
Another question in my case I try to load balance 3 interface firewall [inside,outside,dmz] in order to make the packet return the same firewall it has passed earlier,
What kind of hashing technique do I need to use and Do i need to use mac sticky command ???
I tried to find some configuration sample from cisco website , but i only found with only 2 interface with ACE running source hash and destination hash in each ends,
Thank you very much

Load Balance 2 Wireless Controllers?

Hi Guys,
We are running 2 Cisco wireless controllers here..I believe a 4400 and a 5500..
All our WAPS and Clients are going to the one Individual Controller..Is it possible to load balance all waps/clients between these?
Thanks
James

I support this answer. If you plugged your WLC with all ports on LAG, what are you exactly load balancing ? Nothing will be faster by splitting APs between the 2 WLCs.
In case you anyway split the APs between the 2 WLCs, don't go salt 'n pepper (i.e. if you have 2 APs in a corridor, having them on a different wlc) because that means that every roaming between APs will be inter-WLC roaming. Overhead for nothing. It's best to cut your building in 2 and one are is on wlc1 and the other on wlc2.
While inter-WLC roaming usually works fine and should not cause trouble, it's overhead to go for that while you can have all APs on 1 WLC.
Nicolas
===
Don't forget to rate answers that you find useful

Question about Load Balancing Wireless connections using WLC- F5- ISE

Hi all,
Can anyone give me some orientation how the radius auth process/handshake between the WLC and ISE changes once the F5 is installed in the middle in order to perform load balancing?
We can do some kind of load balancing by configuring different radius servers on each WLC for which, I must configure the same shared secret in the WLC and ISE so the radius request/accept could be processed.
Now that we have the F5 in the middle, do I need to create/configure the same shared secret in the F5 so radius transactions can be processed by this device?. Based on the following link, I must configure the F5 in the ISE like another NAD device (similar to the WLC) but I do not know if this additional configuration in the ISE includes the Auth parameter to be added in the ISE NAD (F5) configuration.
How to properly use a load balancer in Cisco's Identity Services Engine
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/load-balancing-cisco-identity-services-engine
Our sheme is shown next,

When you covert the pair into SSO, all the APs will go to the ACTIVE unit. No unit will "live" in the standby unit because this unit will "share" the AP-support license between the two.
This is the first step you need to get sorted. Send an email to [email protected] and give them the exact details of what you want to do (i. e. AP SSO) and then provide the serial number of your nominated active WLC and the serial number of your nominated standby WLC.

How does Tuxedo 10.0 load balance across the BRIDGE?

Is the load balancing round robin or does work done factored in?

Yes and no. In all honesty, see if this white paper helps answer your question: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/middleware/tuxedo/overview/ld-balc-in-oracle-tux-atmi-apps-1721269.pdf
Regards,
Todd Little
Oracle Tuxedo Chief Architect

Share network traffic between 2 parallel wireless bridges - What kit?

Dear All,
I'm a technology professional, but mainly in electronic design rather than high end networking. Hence my request for your advice.
I wish to specify some items of kit that I can ask a networking professional to fit and configure to solve my particular application.
I would like to use (and already have in place) two parallel wireless bridges between 2 buildings. One is on 2.4GHz and the other is on 5GHz. In my simple testing so far (of each link in turn), they both work brilliantly. So far, these are in place just for test purposes, but soon I will be required to make the system "live".
The reason I'm doing this is to split network traffic over both links (to possibly get enhanced bandwidth) but to mainly build in redundancy should one link fail.
What kit is required to do this (apart from the 4 access points configured as bridges)?
I imagine I may need a load balancing device(s) or possibly something more suitable for this task.
I'd like the solution to be very transparent to the rest of the system, I'd like it to "look" like it's a simple wireless bridge (but really it's a highly robust dual bridge). I hope my waffle makes sense.
Any thoughts?
Best regards,
L.O.

You can certainly copy the addresses from one machine to the other - the contact files are held in user/Library/Application Support/AddressBook. Copy all files into the same respective location on the other machine (they will overwrite any existing contacts).
If you want the address books kept in sync, take a look at SyncTogether or SeeCard Rendezvous.
Matt

RV042 v3 Cable/DSL Load Balancing Issue

I am attempting to load balance 2 ISP connections:
WAN 1- Comcast Cable 1500 MTU
WAN 2- Verizon DSL 1492 MTU
Both connections come up and load balancing is occuring.
After WAN2 DSL is connected to the RV042, web browsing on LAN devices periodically and randomly times out. This oocurs when accessing varous sites including sights on the LAN such as device web configuration pages for the RV042 and the DSL modem. Repeated browser reload commands will bring the pages up. This happens on devices connected by wire and connected wirelessly to the RV042 via an access point. It looks like what an MTU issue would appear and I've dropped the Cable MTU configuration down to 1492 which doesn't resolve the issue. Summarily it appears that after DSL is connect to WAN2, the RV042 starts to choke on web page routing.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

marksbond wrote:Do they share the same switch?
No, the WAN ports are separate from the LAN (switch) ports.
I do know that although the DSL modem is configured in the bridge mode, it's web configuration page remains accessible at 192.168.1.1 if it is accessed directly from a PC while both are off of the network. This is also the address of the RV042 when accessed from the LAN side.
That could be the problem. Have you tried changing IP address on the modem?
I have a similar situation, but I haven't enabled the modem in bridge mode. The modem is used also as AP, so I gave it an address on a different network, disabled DHCP, and connected it from switch to switch on the RV. Yes, 2 cables from the modem switch to the RV, one to the WAN2 port, another to the switch. I also gave the modem a second IP, one in the LAN space, that way I can configure and have general access to its Web interface from the LAN. There's probably a better solution.
I did note in another discussion that Network Service Detection should not be enabled on WAN2 as it is a bridged PPPoE connection. I should note that the only devices connected to the LAN when this issue is occurring are a wireless access point with 2 or 3 clients and a PC wired to the RV042.
There are differences between modems, some can be accessed when they are in bridge mode, some not. But sending pings shouldn't work, the RV is configured to connect to a modem and use pppoe to the ISP, no modem IP defined anywhere (from the RV point of view) so there is no way to send a ping when the IP address is unknown.

Wireless Bridge Load Balancing

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for