Cisco Routers :: RV042 Both Failover And Load Balancing?
Jan 27, 2012
We are looking at purchasing and RV042 soon and have one cruitcial question. I am looking at having two internet connections running into the RV042. The only load balancing is going to be that all the VOIP traffic will go through one connection (eg WAN2) and then have all other traffic (such as web and email) through WAN1.
I am looking to have it so that if one of the internet connections goes down then it will failover EVERYTHING to the one that is working so both the VOIP and all the other traffic share the same connection until both WANs then go back online.
View 3 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Apr 6, 2012
I have a rv042 router with two internet connections. I have setp the WAN1 and WAN2 and set the load balance mode. Surfing on internet is then not a problem and I checked that I was using the two internet connection.However if I try to connect to my corporate (OWA) outlook web access i am looping on the first page where I should provide my credentials.I know that most of the load balancer could be set up with a sticky bit to keep the session on the same WAN connection.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Mar 7, 2013
I bought one of these I am very disappointed by the management interface which is very limited/restricitve.I completely agree with Antonio here. In my case, most of my traffic is HTTPS sobinding https ports to a given WAN port makes the load balancing completely useless!!I also hope there will be a software update including the possibility to keep the session on the same WAN connection.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 25, 2011
We have two asa5520 configured as primary and standby unit in fail over configuration, and all is working properly. Is it possible, with this configuration (fail over), to configure vpn load balancing/clustering?
View 7 Replies
View Related
Mar 28, 2011
We have purchased a Cisco 1921 with twin ADSL after advice from a Cisco sales rep. However I am having trouble working out the load balancing/fail over config for the device.
I would like traffic to balance over both ADSL lines and if one goes down not to interrupt connectivity.
I had a look at ppp multilink but I am unsure our ISP (BT) support this?
!! Last configuration change at 13:18:34 UTC Tue Mar 29 2011!version 15.0service timestamps debug datetime msecservice timestamps log datetime msecno service password-encryption!hostname xxxxxx
[Code]......
View 10 Replies
View Related
Jul 8, 2010
1) 2 x ASA 5520, running 8.2
2) Both ASA are in same outside and inside interface broadcast domains – common Ethernet on interfaces
3) Both ASA are running single context but are active/standby failovers of each other. There are no more ASA’s in the equation. Just these 2. NOTE: this is not a Active/Active failover configuration. This is simply a 1-context active/standby configuration.
4) I want to share VPN load among two devices and retain active/standby failover functionality. Can I use VPN load balancing feature?
Active/Active failover is understood to mean only two ASA running multi-contexts. Context 1 is active on ASA1 Context 2 is active on ASA2. They are sharing failover information. Active/Active does not mean two independently configured ASA devices, which do not share failover communication, but do VPN load balancing. It is clear that this latter scenario will work and that both ASA are active, but they are not in the Active/Active configuration definition. Some people are calling VPN load balancing on two unique ASA’s “active/active”, but it is not
The other confusing thing I have seen is that VPN config guide for VPN load balancing mentions configuring separate IP address pools on the VPN devices, so that clients on ASA1 do not have IP address overlap with clients on ASA2. When you configure ip address pool on active ASA1, this gets replicated to standby ASA2. In other words, you cannot have two unique IP address pools on a ASA Active/Standby cluster. I guess I could draw addresses from external DHCP server, and then do some kind of routing. Perhaps this will work?
View 5 Replies
View Related
Nov 29, 2012
I am going to use a DQ77BK motherboard, which does "dual band" LAN. I have been told that with this, i can use two internet connections (from two different providers), so that when one fails, my computer still uses the other one. As you have understood, i need to be safetly connected to internet. I cannot have internet switched off in the middle of my work.
So, what do i need to do this ?
- Do i need 2 wifi cards, or would 1 "dual band" wifi card (like the Intel centrino 6200) be enough to handle it ?
- Do i need two antennas ?
View 12 Replies
View Related
Jan 27, 2013
One of our customer has 3 ISP Line, out of which Two are Broadband and One is Leased Line. All 3 ISP interfaces are Etherent.
Now, they want Auto Failover with Load balancing among these 3 ISP lines.
Can we do same implementation in Cisco 1941 Router?? What licenses required in router for same?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 21, 2011
I've a network with 28 computers and 2 servers. Each server have a double Gbit port configured in Load Balancing & Fail Over.Now, I want to buy two Cisco's Switch SG 200-26 and I would know the best way to connect them and if it's possible to interconnect them with more than one cable to share the trafic.
1. Is this following solution a good one (does the link between swhitches will work when computers will access to servers) ?
2. Is this next solution possible ?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 16, 2011
I have a ASA5510 actve/standby and create one site to site VPN with remote peer ip address xx.xx.xx.xx, Our VPN traffic running on 6 mb internet link for video conferancing traffic.Now client give another link 2 mb internet and client told to us our data traffic runnig on 2 mb link but this data traffic running on the same remote peer IP xx.xx.xx.xx.Secondly request also they need failover over the ISP link.how we implement the same on ASA 5510.
View 0 Replies
View Related
Apr 8, 2011
How is the best and easiest way to check kind of load balancing on the routers using BGP (Border Gateway Protocol)?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Feb 22, 2012
this 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.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 24, 2011
We have a network topology like 2821 router with MPLS link and 881 Router with DSL Connection(DMVPN).
MPLS Link runs in BGP
DSL Connection runs in EIGRP.
So the existing scenario is like When ever MPLS link goes down Traffic will be moved to DSL connection. and once it come again it will be moved back to DSL using HSRP we are doing this. in this case most of the times my DSL connection will be in standby mode.Now my management decided to use both the links in active state and want to do some load balance between the links for some specific traffic like Internet, WSUS Updates, Antivirus updates need to go through the DSL connection even the MPLS is up and running.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 20, 2010
Our office of 40 employees has two internet connections: a fractional T1 (1.5Mbps up, 1.5 down) and an ADSL (386Kbps up, 6Mbps down). I have our RV082 configured in load balancing mode. Most of the high-bandwidth upstream protocols are bound to the T1 (FTP, SMTP, etc). HTTP is bound to the DSL in order to give users the fastest download experience.Things get fouled up when users attempt to upload via http (for instance, Youtube, Facebook, and Yousendit.com). Since the router recognizes the traffic as HTTP, it sends it up the very slow DSL line. Not only does the user experience long upload times, but downstream http traffic effectively grinds to a halt, due to the nature of ADSL (maximum download speed while uploading is 386kbps).
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 6, 2012
I have dual WAN connections on rv042G in "office 1". LAN is 192.168.10.x
A gateway to gateway VPN is made with another "office 2" on rv042G too.
The goal is to reach the LAN of the other "office 2" : 192.168.5.x
Working good. Now I need to use protocol binding : One LAN ip need to use WAN 2 : All traffic :192.168.10.77~77(0.0.0.0~0.0.0.0)WAN2 -> Working
The rest of LAN should use WAN 1 (same as the VPN) When I create this rules, I can't reach the "office 2" LAN : All traffic : 192.168.10.100~150(0.0.0.0~0.0.0.0)WAN1
What should I do to make it works ?
View 13 Replies
View Related
Feb 13, 2012
In my company we put a RV042 router to connect two links to internet, but we have problem to enter a bank. The solution they gave us was to disable encrypted session balancing but I don´t know how to do it.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 28, 2012
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.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Mar 14, 2013
We have tried a variety of options in an attempt to use Load Balancing (Protocol Binding) with an RV082 that has a site to site IPsec tunnel with another RV082. Both are v3.
Here is the issue. We have dual ISPs, one has great bandwidth, but we incur overages. The other has mediocre bandwidth, but has unlimited usage.
GROUP1 - We want most PCs to use the "unlimited" ISP for general surfing, email, etc. (Bound all ports for range of internal IPs to ANY dest to WAN1)
GROUP2 - We want to use the "faster" ISP for our VPN tunnel (mostly RDP and SIP traffic). (Bound all ports for range of internal IPs to ANY dest to WAN2)
So far everything works. The router will route traffic appropriately and GROUP 1 uses WAN1 and GROUP 2 uses WAN2.
Unfortunately, sometimes GROUP1 users need access to resources over the VPN (WAN2).
There is something not right with the routing. For example GROUP1 can ping and receive responses from devices on the other side of the tunnel, but GROUP1 can't access intranet sites on the other side of the tunnel. They also can't RDP to PCs on the other side of the tunnel.
Why does the router correctly route ICMP, but not RDP?
We've tried adding additional protocol binding rules for specific ports(80, 3389, etc) and ip ranges (both local and remote) to see if we could force GROUP1 traffic destined via VPN through WAN2, but it doesn't work.
Shouldn't VPN tunnels created and configured in the RVs not adhere to protocol binding? It just seems logical to me, but maybe I am missing something.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Apr 16, 2012
RV042 in Router mode.WAN1 preferred.With Smart Link it seems to work to a point.When WAN1 fails, it fails over to WAN2.But then it gets stuck on WAN2 and I have to manually switch to WAN2 preferred and then back to WAN1 preferred to get WAN1 connection to return.The test IP addresses should be just fine as set.
Is there something I should be doing differently?
View 8 Replies
View Related
Jun 6, 2011
I 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?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 30, 2012
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 Related
Apr 16, 2012
I 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 Related
Mar 16, 2013
I 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.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 12, 2011
We bought an RV042 at the end of June. It is used as a gateway and VPN router. DHCP server is disabled and all IPs are configured manually.Every once in a while (Tuesday night, then Friday night - yesterday, it has hapened once or twice before that) the router appears to restart (see log below) then comes back up with system time of Jan 01 2010. At this point the router will no longer load its configuration page (https://10.29.238.197:16443/) and VPN connection to our customer in Africa drops. However, devices behind the router can be reached and can access the internet. The only way to fix this is to power cycle the router at which point everything starts working flawlessly again.The PID VID is RV042 V03 running firmware v4.0.3.03-tm (May 12 2011 21:27:37). Our RV042 is a newer one with Cisco SMB Router branding not the older Linksys branding.
From the log when the router reboots:
Aug 12 22:38:42 2011VPN Log(g2gips0) #141: retransmitting in response to duplicate packet; already STATE_QUICK_I2Jan 1 01:00:05 2010System Logheart : System is upJan 1 01:00:13 2010System LogWAN connection is up : 10.29.238.197/255.255.255.192 gw 10.29.238.225 on eth1Jan 1 01:00:15 2010VPN Log(g2gips0) #1: [Tunnel Negotiation Info] >>> Initiator Send Main Mode 1st packet
I looked at the log more and all the usual messages assosciated with VPN being established are there - the last thing in the log before the router coming back up again is:
Jan 1 01:03:49 2010VPN Log(g2gips0) #4: [Tunnel Negotiation Info] Quick Mode Phase 2 SA Established, IPSec Tunnel ConnectedJan 1 01:03:49 2010VPN Log(g2gips0) #4: [Tunnel Negotiation Info] Quick Mode Phase 2 SA Established, IPSec Tunnel ConnectedJan 1 01:03:49 2010VPN Log(g2gips0) #4: sent QI2, IPsec SA established {ESP=>0x575a01c0 <0x6534ae4e
So it even claims the tunnel should be up but I can never reach anything on the far side.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 7, 2011
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]...
View 13 Replies
View Related
Feb 8, 2012
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?
View 12 Replies
View Related
Nov 14, 2011
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?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Sep 19, 2012
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.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 6, 2013
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?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Nov 30, 2011
i'm trying to accomplish the following:I want to trasport a bunch of vlan layer 2 etherchannel on a pair of layer3 connections, using L3 to load balance.i was considering a pair of options:
1) bridging + gre (non applicable since i cant bridge 2 interface beloging to a etherchannel to a tunnel)
2) L2TP is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology? any reference, configuration example?
3) AoMLPS is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology ? any reference, configuration example?
I cant modify topology, the routers used are ASR1001 It is mandatory that both sites have a layer2 connection between them.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Dec 9, 2010
I have a Cisco 2811 router with two HWIC-ADSL cards configured for dsl connection. I have two lines from the same ISP and i am load balancing between them. I have created a couple of SLA's to check the state of the connections and add to the routing table the two default routes if both are up or any one of them is up.My problem is that when i try to download big files (especially antivirus updates) the download at some point stops (especially the antivirus exits with an error of unreachability). If i shut down one line everything works fine.Could i use something (configuration-wise) to prevent this problem from happening?????Is there any way i can combine the two lines? They are simple ADSL connctions with static ip's.
View 8 Replies
View Related
Jun 25, 2012
One of our customer just purchased ASR1002 router, they have three internet links from different ISPs and they dont have any remote site, they have three different public IP pool as their respective ISPs. So, is it possible to load balance the internet traffic using all three link on Cisco ASR router ( IOS - Advance Enterprise Services)
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jun 10, 2012
I need to configure DSL Load Balancing on Core Cisco Switch 4506-E. I have a Router Cisco 2811 with 2GE Ports and a Firewall Cisco ASA5505. I have 8 Physical DSL Connections with 1Mb each. I need to combine that 8 Mb on Core Switch and allow each end user to access the Internet via the available DSL connection which means that every user has 8 Mb available.
View 7 Replies
View Related
