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

    Old GNU Guy Needs Some Feed Back

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Routing and Multi WAN
    5 Posts 3 Posters 2.0k 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.
    • C
      chronocidal_charlie
      last edited by

      Hi Folks,

      New comer to the forum so, little in intro. Name Charlie, 67 YO, Texas.

      Recently wound up with two ISP, for reasons I'd rather not go into. ;-)

      Be gentle with an old man. My first time in Rome so I may not be doing it, this forum,  like the Romans want me to do it. I been Internet 'nd Usenet 'bout hunnert years, but first time in here. ;-)

      But anyway, in order to make use of both ISP, I decided to build me a dual wan pfSense box and try it out. It's simply a stripped down AMD 3000+ generic box with pfSense installed to HD. Two linksys cards, dc1 and dc2 and onboard vr0.

      dc1 is connected to my RoadRunner cable modem with dynamic IP and dc2 to my Clearwire Wireless Modem with static IP.

      vr0 is set up for my lan with an IP of 192.168.2.1 DHCP enabled and a Linksys Router and Wireless Access point is connected to it which serves two dual boot Linux and Windows computers, a WD-Network Drive, Printer and a SKYPE GE telephone wireless base.

      The Linksys router runs at IP of 192.168.1.1.

      Everything seems to work fine and better than it was previously with only one WAN connection. Seemingly good throughput and it has pretty well carried every load I've put on it.

      I basically have no idea as to what I'm doing or have done and don't even know if what I've got is working properly, could work better or should work better. I just followed the documentation provided as far as the Advanced BSD Dual Wan Router @ netlife.co.za and after a little tweaking, it all came up working or at least seeming to work.

      Firewall and port scan on the pfSense Router shows stealth with all ports blocked from the bad guys out there on the WWW. I reckon all my NAT stuff is OK.

      The generic bandwidth and speed meter tests available on WWW like Cnet, etc. show me running average of 1500 to 1800 Kbs, for what ever that is worth.

      My interfaces show as follows. Can someone in the know give me feedback on it and if I need provide any other information to evaluate if I may have it right or not or as good as I can possibly get it with what I'm doing or working with.

      TIA

      CC

      Status: Interfaces
      WAN interface (dc1)
      Status up
      DHCP up 
      MAC address 00:18:f8:0b:ff:1a
      IP address 70.122.92.197 
      Subnet mask 255.255.224.0
      Gateway 70.122.64.1
      ISP DNS servers
      64.13.46.12
      64.13.48.12
      24.93.41.127
      24.93.41.128
      Media 100baseTX <full-duplex>In/out packets 1557848/98045 (144.12 MB/11.98 MB)
      In/out errors 0/0
      Collisions 0

      LAN interface (vr0)
      Status up
      MAC address 00:0e:a6:7b:85:69
      IP address 192.168.2.1 
      Subnet mask 255.255.255.0
      Media 100baseTX <full-duplex>In/out packets 57220/65877 (7.52 MB/53.32 MB)
      In/out errors 0/0
      Collisions 0

      Clearwire interface (dc0)
      Status up
      DHCP up 
      MAC address 00:04:5a:71:de:fa
      IP address 96.24.16.106 
      Subnet mask 255.255.240.0
      Gateway 96.24.16.1
      Media 10baseT/UTP
      In/out packets 262095/39246 (56.61 MB/2.48 MB)
      In/out errors 0/0
      Collisions    0</full-duplex></full-duplex>

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • GruensFroeschliG
        GruensFroeschli
        last edited by

        The generic bandwidth and speed meter tests available on WWW like Cnet, etc. show me running average of 1500 to 1800 Kbs, for what ever that is worth.

        My interfaces show as follows. Can someone in the know give me feedback on it and if I need provide any other information to evaluate if I may have it right or not or as good as I can possibly get it with what I'm doing or working with.

        pfSense's loadbalancer balances connections and not bandwith.
        So to make use of the multiWAN you need to establish multiple connections.
        I'm not sure how these speedtests work but i doubt that they connect to multiple servers at once.
        Your best bet to test the actual speed is to use some kind of downloadmanager that is able to split a download into multiple connections.
        These connections will be balanced over your two WAN's

        The balancer seems to work or your traffic counter wouldnt be at a few MB's on both WANs :)

        Your hardware is "a bit" oversized ;)
        You could take a look into embedded hardware like the alix2c3 http://pcengines.ch/alix2c3.htm

        We do what we must, because we can.

        Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

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

          pfSense's loadbalancer balances connections and not bandwith.
          So to make use of the multiWAN you need to establish multiple connections.
          I'm not sure how these speedtests work but i doubt that they connect to multiple servers at once.
          Your best bet to test the actual speed is to use some kind of downloadmanager that is able to split a download into multiple connections.
          These connections will be balanced over your two WAN's

          The balancer seems to work or your traffic counter wouldnt be at a few MB's on both WANs

          Your hardware is "a bit" oversized
          You could take a look into embedded hardware like the alix2c3 http://pcengines.ch/alix2c3.htm

          Well, currently, I have Ktorrent running on a Mandriva Machine pulling down SuSE 11 beta. I'm not sure how to go about, or if it's capable of splitting a down load as you suggest. What would you recommend as a DL manager that has that or those capabilities. The Ktorrent is ranging from around 200 KB/s to 800 or better KB/s with average of about 560 KB/s down and 50 KB/s more up with average of about 28 KB/s up. About 25 seeders and same on leechers. Estimated time left is about 2 hours on a 4.3 Gig .iso that I only started about 15 minutes ago. That's about the fastest torrent I've ever experienced from kernel.org. ????

          That's only hardware I had in my closet and junk box at the time. ;-)

          Thanks for the pointer and your quick response and attention.

          Any other suggestions are welcomed.

          PfSense has been fun so far. ;-)

          Hope this formatted right. "Strangers in a foreign land strike a match with trembling hand. Learn too much to ever understand."
          -Phil Ochs

          Charlie

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            drees
            last edited by

            Sounds like you're doing it right.

            BitTorrent will definitely take advantage of multiple WAN connections.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • GruensFroeschliG
              GruensFroeschli
              last edited by

              If you want to make full use of Bittorrent you also might want to forward the port from both WAN's to you Client.
              –> Other clients can connect to you on both WANs.

              We do what we must, because we can.

              Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

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