<![CDATA[Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.]]>I set up a new box for a student dorm. They have 3 VDSL connections.

68aef07f-9a98-4f3a-8a77-acdfc69a1adf-image.png

Let's not get into why they are not named "WAN_A" and so on.

As you can see, WAN_F and WAN_G are behind GNAT and WAN_H has a static IP provided by the ISP.

For those of you who don't know what GNAT is, it is basically a system used by ISPs to make it possible for multiple users to use the same IP address.

Of course, I defined a gateway group so that I could utilize all the three connections as evenly as possible:

8a6c4ec7-3a99-4a49-b6b5-395796168739-image.png

This is how they look in the "Gateways" tab:

42b82dd3-dfc2-4e11-bf16-658f9ce585a5-image.png

The first thing that caught my attention was that the gateway for the VDSL line with the static IP starts with 10! That should not happen, right?

The second thing is that WAN_F and WAN_G have the same gateway, which is not strange.

The shock came when I took a look at interface statistics:
cdd267bd-5c97-4c78-8499-ed282e18420c-image.png

Why isn't WAN_G not being utilized at all? Does that anything to do with them having the same gateway? Is there a remedy? What can or should I do?

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/topic/176265/load-balancing-does-not-utilize-one-of-the-gate-waysRSS for NodeSat, 18 Apr 2026 07:29:50 GMTSun, 04 Dec 2022 15:56:19 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways. on Sun, 04 Dec 2022 18:08:21 GMT]]>@scilek said in Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.:

Double NATting? No, I could not do that.

No, triple-NAT. 😊
You have double already at this time. One time NAT happens on pfSense and one time at your ISP.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073608https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073608Sun, 04 Dec 2022 18:08:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways. on Sun, 04 Dec 2022 16:54:23 GMT]]>@viragomann said in Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.:

You're probably meaning CGNAT (Carrier-Grade NAT).

Yes, right.

@viragomann said in Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.:

Yes. pfSense cannot route between two equal gateways. Each gateway IP and subnet must be unique.

I see.

@viragomann said in Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.:

Alternatively you can put an additionally NAT router in front of pfSense in one of the concerned lines, so pfSense could use the routes internal IP as gateway.

Double NATting? No, I could not do that.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073604https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073604Sun, 04 Dec 2022 16:54:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways. on Sun, 04 Dec 2022 16:41:25 GMT]]>@scilek said in Load balancing does not utilize one of the gate ways.:

As you can see, WAN_F and WAN_G are behind GNAT and WAN_H has a static IP provided by the ISP.

You're probably meaning CGNAT (Carrier-Grade NAT).

The first thing that caught my attention was that the gateway for the VDSL line with the static IP starts with 10! That should not happen, right?

That's quite odd. Never seen, that the gateway gets an RFC 1918 IP, while the interface gets a public IP. But it's possible for an ISP to set it this way using PPPoE.
It would only make issues if you use a local subnet where the gateway IP lies in.

Why isn't WAN_G not being utilized at all? Does that anything to do with them having the same gateway?

Yes. pfSense cannot route between two equal gateways. Each gateway IP and subnet must be unique.

Is there a remedy? What can or should I do?

Get a real public IP.
Alternatively you can put an additionally NAT router in front of pfSense in one of the concerned lines, so pfSense could use the routes internal IP as gateway.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073600https://forum.netgate.com/post/1073600Sun, 04 Dec 2022 16:41:25 GMT