• Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
Netgate Discussion Forum
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login

Where/How to post Procedure for setting up Dual Wan for current Snapshot?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Routing and Multi WAN
32 Posts 6 Posters 11.6k Views
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H
    hoba
    last edited by Jan 27, 2007, 11:29 PM

    Thanks for working on it!  :)

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • P
      Pootle
      last edited by Feb 3, 2007, 8:44 PM

      I'm just setting this up now after upgrading to snap 02-02-2007, I've got load balancing working, just got to put in the failover part now.

      I'm just wondering if the load balancing software could (or perhaps the pfsense configuration code set things up), automatically adjust things when 1 element of the pool goes down, and just route all traffic through the remaining elements of the pool? This would be the noob behaviour, advanced users could still control things in detail if they wanted to.

      The way it currently is, it seems to me though that this is going to get very complex once you have more than 2 WANS, with 3 for example you need 3 pools to allow for each single WAN failing, and also really you should also have another 3 pools for when any 2 of the 3 have failed.  This might be seem a bit overkill, but I can easily see situations where multiple ISPs fail, because they share some common infrastructure, for example if you have 2 ADSL connections and 1 cable connection, the 2 ADSL could easily go down at the same time.

      Notionally you need 3 pools for 2 WANs, 7 pools for 3 WANs and 15 pools for 4 WANs ( or is it 25? ).  Don't want to think what happens for 5 or more!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        hoba
        last edited by Feb 3, 2007, 8:58 PM

        I don't think someone will use THAT many WANs. imo it's rather nice the way it is now and it gives you full control. The only thing that could be enhanced is to have a way to resort the poolmembers for failoverpools without the need of deleting and adding them back (this is more or less cosmetic). Another nice addition would be to automatically update the monitor IPs for dynamic connections.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • V
          Vescovo
          last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 5:09 AM Feb 3, 2007, 9:35 PM

          @hoba:

          Another nice addition would be to automatically update the monitor IPs for dynamic connections.

          Hoba, hopefully I can figure out how to get the information from the modem/routers without resorting to "device specific code". Since my ISP does "dual wan outgoing load balance" on my connection, that is 2 gateways, this update is essential to check for a real failover condition.

          @Pootle:

          This might be seem a bit overkill, but I can easily see situations where multiple ISPs fail, because they share some common infrastructure,

          My understanding of how the pools work is that if there are 3 items in a Balancing pool, that pool will be balanced amongst the active items and if there are 3 items in a Failover pool, that pool will failover to the next item in the active  list. Will this not take care of the situation you mentioned?

          for example if you have 2 ADSL connections and 1 cable connection, the 2 ADSL could easily go down at the same time.

          We are in agreement.  This setup, exactly, is being tested and it will be documented once real results are achieved.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • P
            Pootle
            last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 1:21 AM

            My understanding of how the pools work is that if there are 3 items in a Balancing pool, that poll will be balanced amongst the active items and if there are 3 items in a Failover pool, that poll will failover to the next item in the active  list. Will this not take care of the situation you mentioned?

            Note quite sure I follow this, but leave it for now - its late and I'm still learning.

            We are in agreement.  This setup, exactly, is being tested and it will be documented once real results are achieved.

            Excellent !!

            I've got failover working now and have tested and all looks to work fine.

            Just 1 question in the meantime I hope has a simple answer  :)

            What gateway do I choose if I want traffic (from LAN) to favour a particular WAN link, but be able to fail over to the other?

            (I understand that choosing the balanced pool can use any WAN as it sees fit,
            and that using a specific gateway (for example 192.168.0.1) will force traffic to that WAN connection - which will mean nothing happens if that link fails
            If I use a failover gateway, will that favour the first WAN connection mentioned, but then use the other(s) in order when the first fails?)

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • H
              hoba
              last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 1:42 AM

              Yes, just build a failoverpool for that. It will always use the first available gateway in the list and only failover to the next one if the above gateway(s) are down.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • P
                Pootle
                last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 2:41 PM Feb 4, 2007, 2:33 PM

                I've done this diagram which I think explains the various ways in which a load balancing setup with the new failover capability can be used.  Is this right?

                Its all working like a charm now, and it is not wrongly reporting link down either.  ;D

                pfsensediag.png
                pfsensediag.png_thumb

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • V
                  Vescovo
                  last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 8:40 PM

                  Hey Pootle, that's an excellent diagram. Why don't you add it to the DOC example. The only difference is the DOC sets the the WAN1(192.168.0.2) and WAN2(192.168.2.2) and The modem/routers to 192.168.0.254 and 192.168.2.254. If you can make those changes it will be consistent with the rest of the DOC.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • P
                    Pootle
                    last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 12:06 AM

                    KK, I'll do it in the morning  ;D

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P
                      Pootle
                      last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 2:46 PM

                      @Vescovo:

                      Why don't you add it to the DOC example.

                      Like this?  http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-Wan/Load-Balancing

                      btw its from a visio diagram, if anyone wants the visio file, I'm happy to send it…

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • V
                        Vescovo
                        last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 5:54 PM

                        Hi Pootle,  :-[ Unfortunately, I was not specific enough.
                        In the pfSense Box where you have Gateway 192.168.0.1 it should read 192.168.0.254
                        In the pfSense Box where you have Gateway 192.168.2.1 it should read 192.168.2.254

                        At the edge of the pfSense box where you have 192.168.0.254 it should read 192.168.0.2
                        At the edge of the pfSense box where you have 192.168.2.254 it should read 192.168.2.2

                        At the entrance to the modem/ routers where you have 192.168.0.2 it should read 192.168.0.254
                        At the entrance to the modem/ routers where you have 192.168.2.2 it should read 192.168.2.254

                        To insert the image "in-line" where you thought it would be most helpful you click the image ikon in the menu. It will put code in that looks like this [[Image:Example.jpg]].
                        You then preview the document. Go to the link where you place the example.jpg. You will not see the image. Click the link. It will take you to a page where you can download the image. Name the image something sensible. Once you save the image it appears where you want it.

                        To deteremine the location, ask yourself where the image would be most helpful to you in building the pfsense box if you were doing it for the first time.

                        Thanks very much for contibuting. :D

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P
                          Pootle
                          last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 7:50 PM

                          Ah! I see.  That explains why I got confused reading the guide  :D

                          I've uploaded a new version, can you check it's now got the right addresses?  If OK, then I'll look at editing the page.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • V
                            Vescovo
                            last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 11:40 PM

                            It is perfect! ;D It will be interesting to see how you position it. It is good to get new views. This always improves the documentation.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • L
                              lampie
                              last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 3:00 AM Feb 11, 2007, 2:58 AM

                              I also contributed to the documentation. Added the FTP workaround for multiwan and a little cosmetics :)

                              '''''FTP WORKAROUND'''''

                              If you want to connect to a FTP server you need to add this workaround to your LAN tab.

                              Proto      Source        Port        Destination        Port        Gateway
                              TCP        LAN net      *          127.0.0.1          1 - 65535  *

                              Now the packets are forwarded correctly and you can connect to an FTP server.

                              '''''pORT FORWARDING'''''

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • V
                                Vescovo
                                last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 9:50 AM

                                Hey Pootle, you positioning was great. The image was just put in line. It is a little tricky to do it but it worth it to show your image! The image will make it easier for the next person. ;D

                                Hi Lampie, thanks for you additon.  :)  I know it is hard to add stuff to the DOCO and make it look good! Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to fully test FTP.  My outgoing FTP(passive) has worked with the default rules.  Is the workaround is for Inbound or oubound FTP?  Why is that rule superior to the default LAN -> Wan1 rule in the Firewalls:Rules image?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • P
                                  Pootle
                                  last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 10:11 AM

                                  OK, that's good.  I wasn't sure if it was better to link to the picture or put it in line, but you're right, it works well in line.

                                  Just thinking of doing a short note on running in a VM….

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • L
                                    lampie
                                    last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 7:30 PM

                                    @Vescovo:

                                    Hey Pootle, you positioning was great. The image was just put in line. It is a little tricky to do it but it worth it to show your image! The image will make it easier for the next person. ;D

                                    Hi Lampie, thanks for you additon.  :)  I know it is hard to add stuff to the DOCO and make it look good! Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to fully test FTP.  My outgoing FTP(passive) has worked with the default rules.  Is the workaround is for Inbound or oubound FTP?  Why is that rule superior to the default LAN -> Wan1 rule in the Firewalls:Rules image?

                                    For active FTP connections (not passive) i needed this rule to make it work. Inbound i still have to test, but that is working out of the box i guess. Without this rule i simply cant make any connection (active) to a FTP server.

                                    What i also noticed is that rebooting the system makes after you add these LAN rules is the best option. I had some problems with not correctly forwarding ports to a designated IP adress. After a reboot this worked fine.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • V
                                      Vescovo
                                      last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 8:13 PM

                                      Thanks Lampie, I have also noticed that a reboot after filter changes appears to always make things work that may not have worked before. I will check out your comments later this week.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • S
                                        sullrich
                                        last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 8:21 PM

                                        Update to  the latest snapshot.  There are bits in place to make sure check_reload_status is always running now.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P
                                          Pootle
                                          last edited by Feb 11, 2007, 11:08 PM

                                          Dunno if you spotted it yet Vescovo, but I've amended the document page on multi wan to put in proper wikiheaders so you get a content list at the front - makes it easier to find the bit you want….

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          18 out of 32
                                          • First post
                                            18/32
                                            Last post
                                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                                            This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                                            consent.not_received