I'm not getting completely what you are asking for. Maybe a small diagram would help.

@jeroen234:

you have 2 times the same isp ??? not 2 diferend isp's ????

failover and balingsing works only with 2 differend networks

Just wanted to point out for anyone who might search in the future about Two connections running off the Same ISP network, Yet, have two seperate modems –-

That, YES, it does work, in every conceivable way.

Failover and Balancing works within the same ISP.  How do you think the Cable company is managing their own data traffic?  They are using the same methods failovers and load balancing among their OC-X lines, and even lines in the CMTS area.

Don't mistake this with someone who has a SINGLE cable modem -- And wants dual wan connectivity.  You must have TWO seperate Public IP's, and furthermore devices/modems that are provisioned at X speed.

IE: Two cable modems provisioned at 3Mbs/256Kbps --

Or A cable modem provisioned at 5Mbps/512Kbps and a DSL modem at 3Mbps/384Kbps -- And on and on.

As long as you get two seperate Public IP's from the ISP, that are each capable of independently pulling their own bandwidth it will work.

I know it isn't typical to have Two Cable modems, off the same ISP,.. But for the price it is by far the cheapest manner to obtain a 2 MegaByte per second connection (Overall)  (20Mbps).  Basically 20Mbps for 80$.

Without getting off topic too bad, of course there are reliability problems with residential lines, and running off the same infrastructure if one drops so will the other modem,.. But again, for the money it isn't a bad deal (If you utilize that kind of bandwidth).

Of course a DSL connection and  cable connection would be much more reliable with Failover, as it isn't likely both would be out of service at the identical times, so you'd pretty much have a 100% uptime.

I am relatively new to this software,. but with this Router I've built, I would feel somewhat confident in using the load balancing/failovers in a small business,.. It seems that stable.  And will only become more stable as time progresses.  I am very impressed with the software, and how new it is vs stability.

Just to reiterate:  A Cable Modem and another Cable Modem from the Same ISP will work with Pfsense at full capacity on Load-Balancing and Failover.

I would imagine a DSL modem, and an additional DSL modem from the Same ISP will work just as well. (Of course speeds varying on provisioning levels/line quality).

Good, thanks for solving! Good work guys!

The 1.2beta release are actually the most stable releases available  atm (I even would prefer them over a 1.0.1 stable). You'll be able to upgrade them to the final 1.2 once it comes out without problems via the webgui. The official documentation at http://doc.pfsense.rg will work fine for the 1.2 releases.

you need a monitor ip from both isp's networks
so that the software can see withs isp network is down
and switch to the other isp network
and temp. remove the downed isp network from the loadbalingsing pools

Cool!  Thanks, aldo.

Best,
Martin

for having something like "selfmade-Bonding" it may be nice to have 2 computers: one with PfSense for taking your Networks traffic to the PPPoE-Lines and a second Computer in a Server-Housing to get these Data together to the Net.

The traffic from the intranet could be tunneled and pushed through the PPPoE Lines to the second Computer.

This may increase the Speed of the Internet-Connection up to around 50 MBit/Sec Download and up to 5 MBit/Sec Upload if you can bond 10 DSL-6000 lines. It will be a real fast Network…

Ahh, true, you're using 1.5.5.
Go for 1.9.3.

I've never had any problems upgrading (except when I tried to downgrade… cause I thought I was on a different version).

Show us your firewallrules for these connections as well as the portforwards please.

It only offers Interfaces that have a gateway configured. I guess your WAN Interface is down and has no IP-Configuration and that's why it is not shown in the list. Get some connectivity at WAN and try to create the pool again.

I believe that is for WAN only so it won't work in your situation. But, basic routing metrics wouldn't work for you in that type of situation, as there's no way for the system to detect a failure of the gateway. The only situation that works for with Cisco routers is if it's something like a T1 serial interface, where the physical interface is going to fail if the connectivity fails and then it'll drop the lower metric route. Policy routing on IOS can address that nicely but that's much more than a route metric.

I have the same problem. If I force trafic to a wan2 interface it works. But when I force trafico to load balance interface, don't work. The packets goes always to wan interface.

Failover doesn't close existing states. Since you have a state out the failed connection, it continues to fail, and because the traffic is continuous from your machine, the state never gets closed.

It may be possible to create pass rules for ICMP and change some of the state options to remedy this. Like try lowering the state timeout for ICMP.

No I didn’t it's a bug see attachment

But that isn't the question, how can the computers on the other side of the WAN2 access my network and pfsense gateway

EDIT

FIXED

wille just browzing the web interface i found there is a tab WAN2 (didn't see that before)

enter the new rule for WAN2
Protocol any,Source any,Destination any, Gateway default
enter a new rule for LAN
Protocol any,Source any,source lan subnet, Destination WAN2 subnet, Gateway default

make sure the computer in LAN is not in the same subnet as WAN2

rule.jpg
rule.jpg_thumb

Thanks Pootle for the reply. Since the Port forwarding section of the LoadBalancing wiki page just states to do the normal Portforwards, I see no problems with the rules I set (Port 80 to internal IP system for example…). I am going to do a run down of it once more (3rd time install...) with a clean slate install of pfsense to see if I miss anything.

My goal here is to somehow contribute to the docs as well once everything's working on my setup. Superb work so far with the docs guys! Thanks a bunch.

It will obey the state, independent where the connection was initiated from.

will do that now, that for the suggestions.

And btw, great forums!  Keep up the great work.

I had high CPU problems when I stated using bandwidthd - it put my LAN connection into promiscuous mode, so it was seeing all the traffic on my LAN.

Are you running the torrent VM on your inside network?  I assume you are.

Where are you trying to access it from?  Other machines on the inside network don't need to go through pfsense.

If you are accessing ffrom the internet then you need to forward on the router (if it is NATing) and on pfsense.