Re: PPPoE load balancing
(B (B- Original Message - (BFrom: "lukek" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BTo: "FreeBSD" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BSent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:03 PM (BSubject: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B Hello, (B Let me apologise firstly if this is a topic which has been thrashed to (Bdeath (B on this list. I need some advice before I get myself into a hole that is (B very deep, dark and lonely. (B (B I need to add an additional DSL line to my exisiting network to keep up (Bwith (B the expanding bandwidth requirements of the users. In a situation like (Bthis (B my first reaction would be to get some fibre into the office and take it (B from there but the building we are currently in is unsuitable for fibre ( (B according to the provider ) therefore for the interim I have no choice but (B to get additional DSL circuits. (B (B My question is how difficult is it to get one FBSD router to reliably (Bmanage (B multiple DSL circuits. These circuits would have static IP addresses (B probably /28 on the outside and there are two distinct networks (Binternally. (B An ethernet segment and a wireless segment. (B (B (BBGP (B (B I am using IPFilter and IPNat to provide simple NAT functions and simple (B firewalling functions. If I create further external links ie tun0 and tun1 (B will this create problems for NAT ? I am contemplating separating the two (B internal networks so that the ethernet segment gets routed to tun0 and (B wireless to tun1. Would I need two instances of IPNat and IPFilter or can (BI (B wrap all the rules into one instance of these tools ? (B (B Is there a smarter way to do this ? (B (B (BA burstable T3 (It's copper) (B (B Any advice is appreciated as I suspect that this is not a trivial thing to (B accomplish reliably and given no other real options at this time I have to (B come up with a solution that is reliable. Ideally it would be great to be (B able to get load balancing and failover working but I won't push my luck. (B (B Regards, (B (B LukeK (B (B (BDSL is not meant for multiple links. Having multiple links and running BGP (Bwith your provider will work, but likely should use a non-PPPoE DSL (Bimplementation . Best solution is either multiple T1's and a real router or (Ba T3 of some sort if you can't get fibre. (B (BAdam (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: PPPoE load balancing
Thanks for that, you are of course absolutely correct however here in Japan (Bthe provider of the local loops does not provide T3's and all circuits over (B128K are fibre. So I am stuck. This solution only has to hold together for (Babout 6mths then we move offices and I can get a proper fibre connection but (Buntil then I need a band aid solution. (B (BThanks (B (BLK (B (B Hello, (B Let me apologise firstly if this is a topic which has been thrashed to (B death (B on this list. I need some advice before I get myself into a hole that (Bis (B very deep, dark and lonely. (B (B I need to add an additional DSL line to my exisiting network to keep up (B with (B the expanding bandwidth requirements of the users. In a situation like (B this (B my first reaction would be to get some fibre into the office and take it (B from there but the building we are currently in is unsuitable for fibre (B( (B according to the provider ) therefore for the interim I have no choice (Bbut (B to get additional DSL circuits. (B (B My question is how difficult is it to get one FBSD router to reliably (B manage (B multiple DSL circuits. These circuits would have static IP addresses (B probably /28 on the outside and there are two distinct networks (B internally. (B An ethernet segment and a wireless segment. (B (B (B BGP (B (B I am using IPFilter and IPNat to provide simple NAT functions and simple (B firewalling functions. If I create further external links ie tun0 and (Btun1 (B will this create problems for NAT ? I am contemplating separating the (Btwo (B internal networks so that the ethernet segment gets routed to tun0 and (B wireless to tun1. Would I need two instances of IPNat and IPFilter or (Bcan (B I (B wrap all the rules into one instance of these tools ? (B (B Is there a smarter way to do this ? (B (B (B A burstable T3 (It's copper) (B (B Any advice is appreciated as I suspect that this is not a trivial thing (Bto (B accomplish reliably and given no other real options at this time I have (Bto (B come up with a solution that is reliable. Ideally it would be great to (Bbe (B able to get load balancing and failover working but I won't push my (Bluck. (B (B Regards, (B (B LukeK (B (B (B DSL is not meant for multiple links. Having multiple links and running BGP (B with your provider will work, but likely should use a non-PPPoE DSL (B implementation . Best solution is either multiple T1's and a real router (Bor (B a T3 of some sort if you can't get fibre. (B (B Adam (B (B (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: PPPoE load balancing
Maybe another option: (BPurchasing a hardware solution; I've never used one personally but I have (Bheard good things about the Fatpipe Superstream from friends ($3,000 or so). (BSeveral other companies make the exact same thing just in different forms. (BIt will allow you to bond multiple dsl/cable whatever and you don't need (BBGP. To implement BGP normally you need a pretty beefy router (My feelings (Bare a cisco 3600 and up). (B (BScott (B (B (B (BScott Hiemstra (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] (B (B (B-Original Message- (BFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Adam Maas (BSent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:23 PM (BTo: lukek; FreeBSD (BSubject: Re: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B (B (B- Original Message - (BFrom: "lukek" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BTo: "FreeBSD" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BSent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:03 PM (BSubject: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B Hello, (B Let me apologise firstly if this is a topic which has been thrashed to (Bdeath (B on this list. I need some advice before I get myself into a hole that is (B very deep, dark and lonely. (B (B I need to add an additional DSL line to my exisiting network to keep up (Bwith (B the expanding bandwidth requirements of the users. In a situation like (Bthis (B my first reaction would be to get some fibre into the office and take it (B from there but the building we are currently in is unsuitable for fibre ( (B according to the provider ) therefore for the interim I have no choice but (B to get additional DSL circuits. (B (B My question is how difficult is it to get one FBSD router to reliably (Bmanage (B multiple DSL circuits. These circuits would have static IP addresses (B probably /28 on the outside and there are two distinct networks (Binternally. (B An ethernet segment and a wireless segment. (B (B (BBGP (B (B I am using IPFilter and IPNat to provide simple NAT functions and simple (B firewalling functions. If I create further external links ie tun0 and tun1 (B will this create problems for NAT ? I am contemplating separating the two (B internal networks so that the ethernet segment gets routed to tun0 and (B wireless to tun1. Would I need two instances of IPNat and IPFilter or can (BI (B wrap all the rules into one instance of these tools ? (B (B Is there a smarter way to do this ? (B (B (BA burstable T3 (It's copper) (B (B Any advice is appreciated as I suspect that this is not a trivial thing to (B accomplish reliably and given no other real options at this time I have to (B come up with a solution that is reliable. Ideally it would be great to be (B able to get load balancing and failover working but I won't push my luck. (B (B Regards, (B (B LukeK (B (B (BDSL is not meant for multiple links. Having multiple links and running BGP (Bwith your provider will work, but likely should use a non-PPPoE DSL (Bimplementation . Best solution is either multiple T1's and a real router or (Ba T3 of some sort if you can't get fibre. (B (BAdam (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (B (B (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: PPPoE load balancing
This is quite recent, but get a look at OpenBSD 3.3 (www.openbsd.org) and its packet filter, pf (ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/doc/pf-faq.pdf). It does support bundling unreleated and uncooperative links together. With some scripting, you should even be able to track when a link goes down and reload the rules without it, giving you some sort of failure tolerance. Of course, it is a bit of a hack, but as you need for only 6 monthes... Raphael Le Mardi, 3 juin 2003, à 05:03 Europe/Zurich, lukek a écrit : Hello, Let me apologise firstly if this is a topic which has been thrashed to death on this list. I need some advice before I get myself into a hole that is very deep, dark and lonely. I need to add an additional DSL line to my exisiting network to keep up with the expanding bandwidth requirements of the users. In a situation like this my first reaction would be to get some fibre into the office and take it from there but the building we are currently in is unsuitable for fibre ( according to the provider ) therefore for the interim I have no choice but to get additional DSL circuits. My question is how difficult is it to get one FBSD router to reliably manage multiple DSL circuits. These circuits would have static IP addresses probably /28 on the outside and there are two distinct networks internally. An ethernet segment and a wireless segment. I am using IPFilter and IPNat to provide simple NAT functions and simple firewalling functions. If I create further external links ie tun0 and tun1 will this create problems for NAT ? I am contemplating separating the two internal networks so that the ethernet segment gets routed to tun0 and wireless to tun1. Would I need two instances of IPNat and IPFilter or can I wrap all the rules into one instance of these tools ? Is there a smarter way to do this ? Any advice is appreciated as I suspect that this is not a trivial thing to accomplish reliably and given no other real options at this time I have to come up with a solution that is reliable. Ideally it would be great to be able to get load balancing and failover working but I won't push my luck. Regards, LukeK ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PPPoE load balancing
(B (B- Original Message - (BFrom: "Scott Hiemstra" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BTo: "FreeBSD" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BSent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:37 PM (BSubject: RE: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B Maybe another option: (B Purchasing a hardware solution; I've never used one personally but I have (B heard good things about the Fatpipe Superstream from friends ($3,000 or (Bso). (B Several other companies make the exact same thing just in different forms. (B It will allow you to bond multiple dsl/cable whatever and you don't need (B BGP. To implement BGP normally you need a pretty beefy router (My (Bfeelings (B are a cisco 3600 and up). (B (B Scott (B (B (B (BFor what he's doing, I'd just run a routing daemon on a BSD box, or a Cisco (B2600. No need for a full table. (B (BAdam (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: PPPoE load balancing
Valid point, I must have been dreaming when I originally read his post... (B (BScott (B (B (B (B-Original Message- (BFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Adam Maas (BSent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 8:02 AM (BTo: Scott Hiemstra; FreeBSD (BSubject: Re: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B (B (B- Original Message - (BFrom: "Scott Hiemstra" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BTo: "FreeBSD" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BSent: Monday, June 02, 2003 11:37 PM (BSubject: RE: PPPoE load balancing (B (B (B Maybe another option: (B Purchasing a hardware solution; I've never used one personally but I have (B heard good things about the Fatpipe Superstream from friends ($3,000 or (Bso). (B Several other companies make the exact same thing just in different forms. (B It will allow you to bond multiple dsl/cable whatever and you don't need (B BGP. To implement BGP normally you need a pretty beefy router (My (Bfeelings (B are a cisco 3600 and up). (B (B Scott (B (B (B (BFor what he's doing, I'd just run a routing daemon on a BSD box, or a Cisco (B2600. No need for a full table. (B (BAdam (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (B (B (B (B___ (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (Bhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions (BTo unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
