GRE Tunnel Bonding Protocol [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8157](link url) - "Single flow may use the combined bandwidth of the two connections.
Can this be implemented in pfSense?

It seems Layer2 bonding is one solution. " since load balancing in bonding takes places in Ethernet frames, even a single TCP/IP connection will enjoy an increased band thanks to the presence of multiple links."
[https://zeroshell.org/load-balancing-failover/#vpn-bonding](link url)
Can this be implemented in pfSense?

I believe I am now sorted.

I have left don't pull roots unchecked and in firewall/rules/secondlan advanced options/gateway I chose WAN_PPPoE.

I now have internet connection via VPN on igb1 and igb2 and connection not through VPN on igb4 just as I wanted.

Many thanks for the help

@dimskraft said in Dpinger sendto error: 65 on one of identically configured WANs:

sendto error: 65

Maybe this is relevant?

https://forum.netgate.com/topic/98656/gateway-send-to-error-65

@hebein glad to help you! I think log analyzing will help to reach 100%)

Put the other members of the gateway group on a lower tier. If you have them all on tier 1 then it won't switch when the down member comes back.

Well, the only rule that has seen any traffic at all is the Default allow LAN to any rule, so nothing is being blocked. That's why I suggested you try looking at it from the Synology side.

Sure with the HA proxy you can do that. I do it now for a couple different fqdn.

But that is going to work with http protocols, not going to be able to work with say smtp.

Add each WAN IPs you want to use to the WAN interface. Firewall >Virtual IPs. Use type "IP Alias".

Go to Firewall >NAT >Outbound. Switch into the manual mode. pfSense should take over the automically generated rules for each of your subnets into the manual mode. Edit each one, go down to the translation address and select the outbound IP from the drop-town you want to assign the respective source network.

Create the vlans on pfsense, with the IDs of your vlans and then assign them to the physical interface that is connected to switch.

nobody with ideas?

Thanks. I'll see what I can do.

This was not the fix. needed to adjust a routing statement in the VPN router to include the full / 24 I had mistakenly set it to /28

Okay, my bad. This seems to be an issue with my APs versus pfSense. When I run test-ipv6.com on a wired client, it passes. I'd delete this post, but it errors out. My apologies for the diversion.

Yeah you normally do not have access to manipulate routing inside the mpls network. But you could ask.

Proxy on your end, which you just run on pfsense would be easier way to go for sure ;)

Other solution would be to create a tunnel between their end your end where you could route internet through the tunnel. This removes any routing concerns inside the mpls path.. You could do openvpn from the branch pfsense to yours.