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

    Multi-WAN support with same gateway on multiple interfaces ***{NOW $650}***

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Expired/Withdrawn Bounties
    38 Posts 13 Posters 32.1k 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.
    • G
      GoldServe
      last edited by

      That's good news. I'm very serious about committing $200 of my personal money for this. I use pfsense for home use only as I am a geek =D I paid a little for the traffic shapper changes even though I do not use it but I hear it was well worth it.

      Cheers!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        hhh3h
        last edited by

        @ermal:

        Actually it is quite doable and i am one of the possible implementers of it. Just need to be convinced to do it…..

        Great.. How much total pledge money will convince you?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • E
          eri--
          last edited by

          How much total pledge money will convince you?

          You make your offer and i will give my answer.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • H
            hhh3h
            last edited by

            At this point, I am considering pledging an additional 200 USD on top of GoldServe's 200.

            However, I would feel more comfortable with a bit more convincing that a feature such as this is even feasible to do in the first place.  On page 1, you and cmb were discussing possibilities on how to tackle this initiative, and it didn't appear to have much resolution.

            I appreciate your response.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • E
              eri--
              last edited by

              Sorry not interested with this pledge since it is a major undertaking, really.

              For the matter this is doable with some hacks directly to the kernel not fancy ones but it is doable.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H
                hhh3h
                last edited by

                Thanks anyway ermal.

                Any other developers out there?

                Any other pledges?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  swinokur
                  last edited by

                  There hasn't been much activity on this thread for a while, but I would be willing to pledge $100 to have this sort of support added to pfSense.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    StankCheeze
                    last edited by

                    I'll pledge whatever I can sell my 3 linksys wired routers for, probably $50.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • G
                      GoldServe
                      last edited by

                      I mean this would a great thing to add to pfsense considering commercial or SOHO routers that do multi-wan don't have this limitation. I'm willing to add more ontop of my pledge if someone is capable of adding this!

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        swinokur
                        last edited by

                        Can someone change the thread title to be $550? (its more, since goldserve said he would add more to his pledge)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T
                          thekod
                          last edited by

                          Would it satisfy you to have a MultiWAN wizard that did the NATing for you?  Might be easier to convince someone to do that.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • G
                            GoldServe
                            last edited by

                            I think you are mistaken. Right now, if I have 3 cable modems with the same provider, I will be given three IPs that are probably going to have the same gateway IP address assigned to each interface. The only way to overcome that right now is to put a NAT router infront of each pfsense interface so that it sees three internal ip addresses with different gateways. The bounty is to remove that limitation and modify the inner workings of the kernel to route traffic out of different interfaces with different mac address as opposed to routing by GW only.

                            I think i'm correct in my understanding. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

                            Thanks.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • T
                              thekod
                              last edited by

                              Probably not, I was trying to wrap my head around why this was difficult…ignore me...

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

                                My two cents - Why I think this is important.

                                Many people will say "why go on about multi wan all the time some of us can just about afford 1 ISP link" but some people will have been drawn (myself included) and tried pfsense purley for its multi wan capability when other firewall distributions don't or won't even entertain the idea.
                                It is one of its biggest draws and the stronger a feature it is the bigger the draw. The bigger the draw the larger the client base and hopefully more revenue for the developers.

                                Author of pfSense themes:

                                DARK-ORANGE

                                CODE-RED

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • A
                                  aspeer
                                  last edited by

                                  I am definately willing to see $100 towards this project, I've used clark connect forever but am tired of paying 79.99 a year for multiwan capability with crappy everything else. Its DHCP fails every 4 days… as it is now i use pfsens as a dhcp server and only the cc box for multiwan. Please someone persue this bounty, i might even go 150 if its extremely easy to implementand money can sway your decision....

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • X
                                    xerovis
                                    last edited by

                                    What I would like to see is the option to make multi WAN idiot proof. I know some people might not think this is a good idea but usability is important.

                                    It would be nice to see a GUI that enables you to:
                                    1. select the two interfaces you would like to do multi WAN on
                                              a. Load Balancing or Failover
                                    2. Enter speed and transfer per month

                                    Then Multi WAN is working. Obviously it may be a little more indepth than this, but I am sure you understand where I am going with this.

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

                                      @xerovis:

                                      It would be nice to see a GUI that enables you to:
                                      1. select the two interfaces you would like to do multi WAN on
                                                 a. Load Balancing or Failover
                                      2. Enter speed and transfer per month

                                      1: You can already do.
                                      2: Has nothing to do with the loadbalancer. This is something for the trafficshaper. But afaik this is already done in 2.0.

                                      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
                                      • T
                                        The Swordsman
                                        last edited by

                                        I was hoping for some more implementation on this bounty.  Its been quite a while since the last post.  I have $50 that I could contribute to make this happen.  Is this just not a high priority for anyone?    Just curios if others are still interested?  Even if you only can give $20,  if we have enough people giving $10 or $20, someone will take it…..  I hope.

                                        MOD:  Please change the thread to be $600

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • T
                                          thekod
                                          last edited by

                                          I'll throw in another 50, but what everybody needs to understand is that implementing this completely takes more than just a gui. Its a royal pain in the ass of kernel programmimg…......

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ?
                                            Guest
                                            last edited by

                                            This original bounty is extremely old and is a candidate for removal.  If the original bounty posters are still interested, then this bounty can stay active, but it will require someone willing to take this bounty up.  If you want this bounty to stay active, contact the original bounty posters and ask them to say so in this thread.

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