I found that load balancing in a NAT environment was much better handled with PCC. Might not fit for you, Just something to look at. </2cents>
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/PCC Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 ---------------------------------------- From: "Rubens Kuhl" <rube...@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 9:01 PM To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Subject: Re: [WISPA] MikroTik as Load Balancer? > I was playing around with a spare rb433 doing something similar to what > you just posted (nth+conn-mark rules) but, things were not working > properly. I noticed my connections were really really slow, I don't know > if I did something wrong. It's very easy to do something wrong in such kind of setup. Look first to counters using Winbox while generating traffic (both connected and new connections); if that doesn't show what's wrong, packet captures are the next resource. > One other thing, how about fail over? If one line goes out would the > other 3 work and that other line would be ignored until is back up? How > can that be done? A route on RouterOS have a check_gateway attribute, and usually arp or ping dies when the line dies. You can go further than that by using scripts like the ones in http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/ECMP_Failover_Script in order to kill a line when something dies beyond the last-mile hop. / ip route add dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=Uplink-A scope=255 target-scope=10 routing-mark=Route-Mark-A comment="" disabled=no check_gateway=ping / ip route add dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=Uplink-B scope=255 target-scope=10 routing-mark=Route-Mark-B comment="" disabled=no check_gateway=ping / ip route add dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=Uplink-A scope=255 target-scope=10 comment="" disabled=no check_gateway=ping distance=2 / ip route add dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=Uplink-B scope=255 target-scope=10 comment="" disabled=no check_gateway=ping distance=2 Note that when Uplink-A dies, the traffic with Route-Mark-A will match the last route to Uplink-B because the two routes to Uplink-A will be disabled by check_gateway (and be brought back when it comes up). Rubens > I would also love to prioritize traffic, SYN ACK flags and DNS be on the > highest priority, etc... > > I know is too much but, would like to do something like that, I don't > know if all these are doable at the same time. You first need to move the queues back to Mikrotik, as it usually sees your ADSL/Cable line as 100 Mbps that won't ever be congested. Shaping the outbound interfaces to actual ADSL uplink is the starting point, and it's doable at the same time. The complexity of the ruleset will increase, so I recommend doing all the load-balancing + fail-over stuff, and then moving to QoS. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
