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

    Multi WAN seems to be poorly implemented

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Routing and Multi WAN
    48 Posts 10 Posters 18.5k 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.
    • F
      frater
      last edited by

      At first I thought that the sticky connections were a bit more advanced. I thought that source/destination relationships determined the gateway it will take from then on, but it turned out all traffic will keep going over the same gateway within that pool…..

      According to the text given with the patch it DOES say there's a source/destination relationship that determines this stickyness....

      Setting this timeout higher will cause the source/destination relationship to persist for longer periods of time.

      Can someone authorative on this matter clarify this?

      A bit less advanced, but it should solve the problem I'm having even better…
      But ever since going from 2.0 to 2.01 things have worsened...
      I now made a rule that https traffic (nothing fancy, just port based) should go over 1 specific gateway.
      Ever since I made that rule we're not getting kicked from shopping sites and our own hosting server....

      But no-one reacted on the test I made, using tcpdump on our hosting server running Plesk 10.4....
      I'm making some changes on that server and after applying them I get kicked to the home screen....
      I checked the tcpdump and it shows me I'm coming all of a sudden from a different IP.
      I checked the system log to see if that interface went down, but it didn't....
      pfsense suddenly decided to let trafffic go over another gateway....

      That shouldn't even happen without that patch....

      I'm taking this "tcpdump test" as proof that it "sticky" isn't working in 2.01
      I didn't do enough tests in 2.0 to say for sure it was working, but I had a feeling it did.....

      So, does it stick or not?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cmb
        last edited by

        2.0 and 2.0.1 kernels are identical, would not be any difference between them.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • F
          frater
          last edited by

          @cmb:

          2.0 and 2.0.1 kernels are identical, would not be any difference between them.

          OK….

          But could you comment on the tcpdump test I did?
          Do you agree that it should not be able to happen if "sticky connections" was working and no interface went down?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C
            costasppc
            last edited by

            Hello,

            I can confirm these issues myself. I had to route HTTPS traffic through onevWAN (and one failover), since we had issues with bank sites and Plesk.

            The issue persist also in some webmails through port 80, so we ave instructed to access webmail through HTTPS.

            For the update of having the timeout field we should wait for 2.1, or can we have it earlier, please?

            Best regards

            Kostas

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • pttP
              ptt Rebel Alliance
              last edited by

              @costasppc:

              Hello,

              For the update of having the timeout field we should wait for 2.1, or can we have it earlier, please?

              Best regards

              Kostas

              You can have it "now"

              http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,43989.msg229133.html#msg229133

              https://github.com/bsdperimeter/pfsense/commit/4573641589d50718b544b778cea864cfd725078a

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • K
                kevindd992002
                last edited by

                @ptt:

                @costasppc:

                Hello,

                For the update of having the timeout field we should wait for 2.1, or can we have it earlier, please?

                Best regards

                Kostas

                You can have it "now"

                http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,43989.msg229133.html#msg229133

                https://github.com/bsdperimeter/pfsense/commit/4573641589d50718b544b778cea864cfd725078a

                I don't get it, where is 2.1 in that link?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • pttP
                  ptt Rebel Alliance
                  last edited by

                  It is not about get 2.1, it is about get "sticky connection source tracking time out" option just as it is in 2.1

                  http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,43989.msg229457.html#msg229457

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • K
                    kevindd992002
                    last edited by

                    @ptt:

                    It is not about get 2.1, it is about get "sticky connection source tracking time out" option just as it is in 2.1

                    http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,43989.msg229457.html#msg229457

                    Ok, I misunderstood.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • First post
                      Last post
                    Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.