I have several RV16 with two internet connections each one, but different speed each wan connection, it takes the slowest wan connection allways, I use the round robin option, any clue in configuring?
View 1 Replies
We have :DSLT-1 I want to route all VOIP traffic and traffic to one IP address over the T-1, all other traffic I want to route over the DSL. HOWEVER, in the event that the DSL fails, have the DSL traffic failover to the T-1.I have setup the router to do just that (I think) and when I go to a site like "whatismyipaddress.com", it shows my IP as comming from the T-1. With the setup I described that traffic should always route over the DSL.Straight up protocol binding won't work because the traffic I want to route over the T-1 to one specific IP is going to be prot 80 and 443 (web traffic)
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have problem with VPN and Load Balance at the same time.VPN (Gateway to Gateway) between two RV042 routers is working fine with only one WAN or two WAN's with Smart Link Backup. If i switch to Load Balance communication through VPN is almost impossible.
I have postgres server (port 5432) in first location and clients in another. Clients cannot connect to server or lose connection after while. This is example, but every communicaton except ICMP over VPN with Load Balance enabled is faulty (file sharing, RDP...). Everything works fine using public IP and port forwarding or VPN with only one WAN.
If i understand it correctly Protocol Binding should affect only "normal" communication (outside of VPN), but it looks like VPN communication is also divided between WAN1 and WAN2. Of course this cannot work this way because VPN works only with one WAN.
Another question - is it possible to bind communication TO selected target port with RV042 Load Balancing to selected WAN?
I want to split my traffic between two ISP's. I want all traffic to pass over one connection EXCEPT my VPN tunnels, which I want to use the second ISP. How should I set up (protocol binding?) to accomplish this? (I have run into various problems trying to load balance all traffic. So I am trying to "partition" traffic.)
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have set up an RV042 v1 and v3 both in Load Balancing mode. Set in Router mode.I want one of the WAN ports to be preferred so I added a static route to 0.0.0.0 metric 5 to that WAN.Sometimes the route shows in the routing table and sometimes it goes away!!
View 2 Replies View RelatedI configured a RV042 to load balance 2 WANs. It appears to working well but I would like a 2nd opinion as to whether or not I chose the proper settings to accomplish the task.
1. WAN1(ISP1) is the existing internet connection(1.5mb T1). I have a block of static IPs with ISP1.
2. I added ISP2 to the RV042's WAN2 connection to increase bandwith (10mb). I only have one static IP on ISP2.
3. I want everyone on this router to use WAN2... well... almost everyone... for the most part.
4. I want to keep WAN1 active on this router because there will be periodic inbound connections using static IPs (from ISP1) that are setup with one-to-one NAT. I also have a voicemail system that needs to continue to use ISP1's email relay (SMTP,25).
Anyway, I was able get the outgoing traffic that had to remain on WAN1 working with protocol binding. In order to get the router to use WAN2 for pretty much everything else, I set it for load balancing and set "Max. Bandwidth provided by ISP" for WAN1 up & down kbits/sec both to 32 (very low). I left the WAN2 up & down settings to the actual speed of WAN2.
The result is very low traffic on WAN1 and lots of traffic on WAN2 which is what I wanted. Did I do this right? Is there another preferred method to accomplish this.
I have 3 877 ADSL routers for internet connectivity. I recently installed a FW behind them and would like to use the Ciscos as load balance in order to get better utilization from my 3 internet links.
1) the 3 routers are on DHCP from the ISP on the WAN side.
2) the 3 ciscos are on the same class C subnet on the LAN side: 10.201.1.252, 10.201.1.253 and 10.201.1.254
ISP environment with 3 Cisco 7200 BRAS ( NPE-G2 ) , we need to load balance traffic between two of them so the load balancer will accept traffic from backhauling link and distribute traffic the upper two BRAS , can we achieve this using spare 7200 we have or is there any software solution can do this .
another question , Cisco 7200 VXR ( NPE-G2 ) , does it support concurrent calls or sessions from more than 16000 subscriber ?
I've purchased a Linksys RV042 hoping I could connect my two ISP.Both of them are 1/1 Mb, first is DSL second PPPoE connection.The problem is that on system summary page it doesn't show me that second WAN is connected. Even when I trying to manually connect to Internet it doesn't work.
When this connection is in Load balance Mode, internet is very slow, sometimes it's even disconnected.
My question is:How to configure Load Balance properly?I've tried this page:
[URL]...
We have an RV042 on firmware version 1.3.13.02 and 2 ISPs:
WAN1 = Telepacific T1
1.5Mbps down and 1.5Mbps up
WAN2 = AT&T U-Verse
12Mbps down and 5Mbps up
I have it set to Load Balance, Primary WAN = WAN2
Network Service Detection enabled, only pinging the Remote Host of 4.2.2.2 and set to Generate Log
Bandwidth is set to:
WAN1 = 1000Kbps upstream & downstream
WAN2 = 5040Kbps upstream & 12000Kbps downstream
It seems to pick WAN1 a lot of the time. Do I have something setup wrong?
We have 2 dsl lines coming in and the modem is in bridge mode while the router handles the pppoe information. Each line is 6mb down and .5 mb up. It's ****, yes I know, but this is pretty decent for a small town in the country. To double our bandwidth, I put it in load balance mode. When load balance, I get anywhere from 9-12 down and .8 up. Here's where it gets tricky.
When anything is uploaded, the speed drops from 9-12 down and .8 up to about .2-.7 down and .2 up. I realize that we will lose some down and up speed but I wouldn't think it would be this drastic. Is this normal?When they upload to a specific https site (file is about 50mb), it never initiates the upload. If I switch it to Link Backup, it will upload fine. I still lose the speed but at least it does something. I've read that some https sites have issues with grabbing data from multiple IP's so I figured this is the case since it's a medical site that was probably developed in house. Is this true?Does protocol binding work in Load Balance mode? I binded all http and https traffic through WAN 2 interface however, when I do a speed test or check my external IP, it is not indicating the WAN 2 IP address. Is this a common issue in rv042's or is there a firmware update that solves all these issues?
I have an RV042 (it's old, silver/dark grey plastic front one) w/ firmware 1.3.13.02-tm.
The reason we bought this (long ago) was to balance two WAN connections, one with unlimited data and one capped monthly. It did that once, but for a couple years both connections have been unmetered so it's just been balancing them 50/50. As of today one WAN connection (the new much faster one) is back to being metered but I can't figure out how to configure the RV042 as it once was to prefer sending traffic over the slow, unmetered connection first, and only use the faster metered connection when necessary.
It's been a long time and honestly I only vaguely remember the ability to prioritize a connection based on % of bandwidth used so that all traffic would go over the unlimited connection 1st until it was flooded, and only then fall over to the metered connection. This is totally different than the weighted round robin, or smart link backup.
I found this 3rdparty forum post that supports that vauge memory and suggests this was eliminated between firmware 1.23 and 1.3: [URL] Is it possible to replicate this functionality with the current firmware? if so how? If not, how to do roll back to firmware 1.23?
It sounded like perhaps I could assigned WAN1 a bandwidth of 100000 (even though it's really 1500) and then assign WAN2 a bandwidth of 1 (even though it's really 20000) and the result might be the prioritization I'm looking to achieve... but I feel like I'm stumbling in the dark at the point.
i am having a problem of load balance traffic over two WAN links connecting our 2 cisco 7600 routers, as i just knew that 7600 is not supporting per packet load sharing only per destination and as per our monitoring tools that one link is underutulized the other is overutilized.
View 10 Replies View Relatedthis router (RV016v3, Firmware: v4.1.1.01-sp (Dec 6 2011 20:03:18)) in regards to it not properly directing UDP packets out of the right WAN, as per the settings stored in Protocol Binding section of [System Management, Multi-WAN].I use the section to direct all traffic from desktop computers (192.168.5.100 ~ 192.168.5.199) through WAN4, and all VoIP related traffic (192.168.5.200 ~ 192.168.5.239) through WAN2(PPPoE).Everything seems to be working well except for some of the UDP traffic from 192.168.5.200 which is seen in the log going out of WAN4 instead of WAN2.I have even created a new entry for [UDP/5060~5060]->192.168.5.200~192.168.5.200(0.0.0.0~255.255.255.255)WAN2, and placed it at the very top of the list.Here are a few lines that I've observed in the log: (Refreshed the registration of two SIP Trunks configured in our PBX)
Feb 23 18:11:47 2012 Connection Accepted UDP 192.168.5.200:5060->184.72.227.214:5060 on eth4
Feb 23 18:11:46 2012 Connection Accepted UDP 192.168.5.200:5060->50.56.59.168:5060 on ppp2
Feb 23 18:11:46 2012 Connection Accepted UDP 192.168.5.200:5060->184.72.227.214:5060 on eth4
Feb 23 18:11:46 2012 Connection Accepted UDP 192.168.5.200:5060->50.56.59.168:5060 on ppp2
There are no static routes configured, so i'm baffled by what could cause some of the UDP packets to go through the wrong WAN.All TCP Traffic from 192.168.5.200 is seen going though WAN2 as it should.
I am trying to make this router prefer Wan1 for outbound while listening to both WAN ports for Inbound. I set it to Load Balance mode and added in a rule for Protocol binding:
All Traffic( TCP & UDP/1-65535)>192.168.1.1~192.168.1.254(0.0.0.0~0.0.0.0)WAN1 ENABLED
This says bind all Outbound traffic to anybody to WAN1
My Wan 2 connection is over satellite so it is easy to tell if a ping is going over Wan2 because the latency is >600mS
If I start a continuous ping to outside site - eg Yahoo.com then if I Fail WAN1 I see the ping latency Jump from 30mS to 700mS as it starts to use Wan2. If I restore the Connection to Wan 1 then the pings stay on WAN2 - seemingly forever. If I stop pinging for 30 mins then a restart of pinging does use Wan1 - so it fails back eventually If I restore Wan1 and then remove Wan2, it fails back right away
My problem is with our VOIP which uses a connection keepalive so there is no real downtime for the router to release the path to WAN2 should it fail over how I can force the router to fail back to Wan1 without removing Wan2?
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.
What is the best way to load balance traffic between an FWSM and ASA 5520? Both are attached to a 6509-E (in seperate VLANs). The problem is the FWSM doesn't support any dynamic routing protocols (in multi context mode). So with my limited knowledge I don't see a way to do this.
View 8 Replies View RelatedIs it possible configuring load balance with three intefaces, in my router with the following features?I have three ISP, and would like balance the traffic ... Cisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.2(2)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Cisco CISCO2911/K9 (revision 1.0) with 483328K/40960K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FTX1613AH8D
3 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces
1 terminal line
2 Channelized (E1 or T1)/PRI ports
1 Virtual Private Network (VPN) Module
DRAM configuration is 64 bits wide with parity enabled.
255K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
250880K bytes of ATA System CompactFlash 0 (Read/Write)
[code]....
I am using 192.168.1.1 as database server in head office. my branch user are more than 500. all user hit at 192.168.1.1 for database. Now i want to NAT with application server 192.168.1.50 and 192.168.1.51 with load balance As some user hit 192.168.1.1 form branch but traffic go to 192.168.1.50 and some users traffic go to 192.168.1.51.
I want to do it in My core router (Cisco 3845) in Head office. How i do these two things ?
So I can fail over my NAT and IPSEC VPN (DPD). I am curious can I load balance my WAN links too?
I have a route map that is used for fail over, I just can't quite think how I would load balance the links
ip nat inside source route-map 10mb interface GigabitEthernet0/1 overload
ip nat inside source route-map efm interface Vlan3 overload
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 213.38.xx.xx
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 46.226.xx.xx 10
access-list 175 deny ip 172.16.20.0 0.0.0.255 172.31.114.0 0.0.0.255
[code]....
i am using two internet connection if one fails the other want to connect automatically is there any hardware.
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe configured sa520 load balance with 2 isp 2mb+2mb how to check the status of the load balance on sa 520 .
View 1 Replies View RelatedI would like know, what license is necessary to employ a load-balance in a 2911 router. I have these licenses bellow, can i configure an load balance?In this cenario we have two links with an ISP.
Cisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.2(2)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Cisco CISCO2911/K9 (revision 1.0) with 479232K/45056K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FTX1613AH8D
1 FastEthernet interface
3 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces
1 terminal line
2 Channelized (E1 or T1)/PRI ports(code)
We have a Dlink Lb 604 router. We have two wan connections. Connection 1 has a speed up to 8 Mbps.Connection 2 has a speed of 1Mbps.We set the load balance to 50-50. When we tested the speed with two lines it is showing 1 Mbps only.When working with connection 1 we are getting speed upto 6 Mbps.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a D-Link DSL 2640B on the way which I plan on using to replace my 2Wire modem. The 2640B is a combination of a modem/wireless device. Does it dynamically load balances the internet connection? Sometimes while I'm playing online games on my PC and a few others are using the internet for browsing or Youtube, I lag A LOT. Latency shoots up from 10 to 200. QoS goes to ****. And I only need 0.50-1Mbps to keep a steady online play. This was the problem with my 2Wire. So does the 2640B load balance the bandwidth?our max speed is 3.5Mbps according to the ATT Rep.
View 10 Replies View Relatedi need to know how many links i can using with load-balance on the same router ? i have router cisco 2901 , 3 providers , every provider having 4 links can i load balance between 12 links ? i am using static route
View 11 Replies View RelatedWhat is the load balance method of 3750 port channel ( by source ip , or by source mac ) to diver traffic to paths? I have tried to use 10.242.104.101 and 10.242.104.102 as source ip, it will travel to the same link (G0/1) within one port channel (G0/1+G0/2). Howerver, if I later use 10.242.104.109, then this time it will traffic to G0/2 link. What's the concept behind.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have two ISP circuits and the following devices in hand:
1. Cisco ASA 5510
2. Cisco 2800 router
3. Cisco 3750 switch
I've finished a part of the configs on above equipments, please refer to the attached diagram.And I'm making a test in order to achieve the below features:
1. By default, packets from PC1 go out through ISP 1. Packets from PC2 go out through ISP 2
2. When ISP 1 is down, packets from PC1 changed its way to ISP 2 through the 2800 router. And when ISP 2 is down, Packets from PC2 changed its way to ISP 1 through ASA 5510.
--- I have 2 WLC's 5500 that I have to set up on my network with the same configuration except I am not sure that they can be load balanced.
-- My only thought is to take a full class C and on each WLC set up a /25, thus each device can provision 120 IP's
--- This seems a bit archaeic, but is there anything else smarter to do? Can they be load balanced?
We want to us an ISA570 and load balance between two isp connections, two of our switches will be standalones and not connected to one another. One switch will be for data and another VOIP/Data. The ISA will also do NAT and we need to make sure that the VOIP network can get out to the first isp. I assume we will need a static route for that to make sure it goes out the right isp. I just don't know if routing mode needs to be enabled in order to specify a static route, because I heard you can't have NAT and do routing mode at the same time.
View 2 Replies View RelatedHow to load balance two/three ISPs using ACE.
What might be the default gateway?Can i create a serverfarm with two rserver with different subnets?
Have two ACE 4710 in HA setup. We would like to setup HTTPS loadbalance(actually just a primary and standby configuration in the serverfarm). Initially this would be for Exchange OWA connections but may expand to more HTTPS connections later. I know there are several ways to do SSL with the ACE( client, server, end-to-end). I am just wanting to know the easiest way to deploy this? Is a certificate always needed on the ACE for each connection? In HA mode would a certificate be needed for both or does it replicate in some way to the other ACE?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI have been experiencing some issue with a portchannel interface.I have two cisco switches 3560 and I have a portchannel between them ( It is composed by two gigabitethernet interfaces generating a portchannel of 2 Gigas ).Unfortunately, I am verifying that one interface traffics about 893MB but the other interface only traffics about 100MB.Is there any cause why is this happening? I thought that maybe both interfaces would traffic about 450MB.Is there some wrong configuration with the load-balance command?. At this moment there is no load-balance, It is only configured the port channel with the default configuration.
View 5 Replies View Related
