<![CDATA[MultiWAN PPPoe]]>just curious if anyone has tried this successfully.  Some older post show it as broken and I tried a few months ago without sucess.  I have a site with 2 DSL's that I could test on, but would like to see if any known progress has been made.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/topic/21074/multiwan-pppoeRSS for NodeMon, 15 Jun 2026 20:15:09 GMTThu, 28 Jan 2010 20:34:36 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to MultiWAN PPPoe on Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:27:38 GMT]]>Thanks for the info.  I will give it another go shortly.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/221908https://forum.netgate.com/post/221908Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:27:38 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to MultiWAN PPPoe on Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:42:56 GMT]]>Update 2010-01-30: From a generated pf rule
pass in log quick on em1 route-to { (pppoe0 25.26.68.69), (em4 192.168.0.65), (em5 192.168.0.69) } round-robin inet all flags S/SA keep state label "USER_RULE: pass others out via any WAN"

This is an outbound load-balancing rule. em1 = LAN, pppoe0 = WAN, em4 = OPT1, em5 = OPT2. I've connected two  PPPoE links sharing the same gateway to OPT1 and OPT2 through ISP's NAT devices, to address the route-to-gateway-only short-coming.

Now, with RELENG_8_1 it appears that PF route-to function was improved. It can now route to interface and gateway thus the NAT devices seem to be no longer necessary.

Untested. You should try it to see if this is true.

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/221357https://forum.netgate.com/post/221357Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:42:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to MultiWAN PPPoe on Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:16:59 GMT]]>I have 3 PPPoE links and I'm running the latest BETA-1 snapshot. It works, provided that the links are from different ISPs (to be exact, different gateways).

]]>https://forum.netgate.com/post/221346https://forum.netgate.com/post/221346Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:16:59 GMT