On 14-01-05 08:56 PM, Benjamin Swatek wrote:
I’m only looking to push 8Mbps through two 3Mbps and one 2 Mbps ADSL
lines (MultiWAN) for each of which I pay more than the national
minimum wage - this is Bolivia - trying to satisfy my business’s needs
to answer to emails asap as well as my clients expectations for a fast
WiFi - that is people who don’t have a clue how expensive 1 Mbps is
compared to the 1st world.
So yes, my links are constantly congested ;-)
Oops, I've mixed you up in my mind with someone else who recently asked
for assistance with VLANs and trunking, but they wanted to use a pfSense
box *as* a switch.
I've steered you the wrong way altogether!
I have a TP-Link 8 port switch ( http://tinyurl.com/m2rbcdt ) that
connects the 3 LANs and the 3 WANs to the pfSense Box.
But I’m not sure anymore what help it is.
I had the LANs coming in on their own physical NICs, but couldn’t get
them together for QoS neither.
I can get them all in their own queue for shaping, but that way I
could only limit each LAN individually not taking into account what
the other one needs.
You've got everything you need.
The only place you can usefully control QoS in your environment is on
the *UP*link to your ADSL provider. If you have NICs dedicated to each
subnet, then you're already at 1Gbps dedicated to each subnet. Not
really, because pfSense on that hardware can't do 1Gbps, but at least
ethernet isn't the bottleneck.
By controlling upstream bandwidth, you can have *some* effect on
downstream bandwidth. By ensuring that no single upstream link is 100%
congested, you will almost certainly improve response time and latency.
There will be absolutely no benefit to putting a traffic-shaping policy
on inbound traffic; I can explain the logic behind this statement if
it's not obvious, but in short: the data has already arrived at the DSL
modem (and thereby filled up the pipe) long before pfSense can touch it;
by the time pfSense sees the packet, it's far too late to do any traffic
shaping. If you could put a matching pfSense box at the ISP's location
(hooked up to a 10- or 100-Mbit port), you could then usefully apply QoS
in both directions. But, good luck with that, most ISPs (speaking as a
former ISP operator, here) won't understand or care, or if they do
they'll charge you an arm and a leg.
I believe what you need is a standard multi-WAN setup. No VLANs or
trunking are needed at all in your situation. You will need to apply a
traffic shaping policy on all three WAN connections; you can apply the
identical policy on all, or different policies on each. If you're using
pfSense's multi-WAN feature with equal weights, I recommend placing the
same traffic policies on all three lines.
However, bundling the three DSL connections together this way won't
produce the results you expect; pfSense doesn't magically bond uplinks
and downlinks together - no standard router or firewall really can do a
good job of that. pfSense does a decent job of load-balancing, but the
end results are imperfect and do not magically reflect a 3x increase in
usable bandwidth.
Make sure you read https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-WAN_2.0 ; you
might want to buy the pfSense book, it's included in the $99 Gold
subscription from Electric Sheep Fencing (see
https://portal.pfsense.org/subscribe-for-access.php).
You might want to have a look at Mushroom's "Truffle" router. Yes, I'm
serious, that's the real name of the product. It might be useful to
you, or it might not. Latency from Bolivia might suck if you use their
cloud service on the far end; you might still have to find somewhere to
host the server side to get the most out of the "bonding" mode they offer.
Good luck, feel free to ask for clarification here if needed.
--
-Adam Thompson
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
