hi, could you please tell me about that can i have a computer that itself share and management both internet and i don't need to manage which client use any gateway. In fact each time 192.168.0.1 is down automatically 192.168.0.100 switched to 192.168.0.2.
Thanks.
I saw a thread a while back, The jist was to use 2 routers, with DHCP disabled. IP addresses were assigned manually. The default gateway for each computer would be set manually, according to router to handle the internet connection. (kind of like a static manual load balance)
example:
router1/Internet1 : LanIP 192.168.0.1 WanIP: (to match ISP)
router2/Internet2 : LanIP 192.168.0.2 WanIP: (to match ISP)
Computer1 : IP 192.168.0.100, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.1
Computer2 : IP 192.168.0.101, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.2
Computer3 : IP 192.168.0.101, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.2
Computer1 would use the first internet connection, Computers2/3 would use the second internet connection. All PC would be able to 'see' each other.[/quotemsg]
Thanks.
I saw a thread a while back, The jist was to use 2 routers, with DHCP disabled. IP addresses were assigned manually. The default gateway for each computer would be set manually, according to router to handle the internet connection. (kind of like a static manual load balance)
example:
router1/Internet1 : LanIP 192.168.0.1 WanIP: (to match ISP)
router2/Internet2 : LanIP 192.168.0.2 WanIP: (to match ISP)
Computer1 : IP 192.168.0.100, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.1
Computer2 : IP 192.168.0.101, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.2
Computer3 : IP 192.168.0.101, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.2
Computer1 would use the first internet connection, Computers2/3 would use the second internet connection. All PC would be able to 'see' each other.[/quotemsg]
grindbox69
Honorable
- May 11, 2012
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
You will need a special router to combine the connections.
There are a few companies that offer Dual-WAN or even multi-WAN routers out there. They are all pricey. The one I ended up going with is a Multi-WAN router from Xtreem-Routing Networks http://www.xtreem-routing.com/multi-wan.html. I see a dramatic increase in torrent downloads. Its helpful when I play Call of Duty online, only because of the fact I can choose which connection I want my gaming to go through. And since the routers CPU is a dual core processor, its extremely fast.
There are a few companies that offer Dual-WAN or even multi-WAN routers out there. They are all pricey. The one I ended up going with is a Multi-WAN router from Xtreem-Routing Networks http://www.xtreem-routing.com/multi-wan.html. I see a dramatic increase in torrent downloads. Its helpful when I play Call of Duty online, only because of the fact I can choose which connection I want my gaming to go through. And since the routers CPU is a dual core processor, its extremely fast.
I used to have two links at my house for redundancy.
The mechanism that accomplished this level of redundancy is when the Internet went down, I plugged into the other connection. Whew… done.
I’m sure you “can” do this. My question would be why do this for a home network?
You never achieve what more then one ISP’s link can give you. Think about this from a path cost perspective. If you had:
Gig link ←>10Mbits/sec link ←> gig link
The path cost is based on the slowest link in the path. You can’t get more then the 10Mbit/sec link will give you even though you have a gig on each side of it.
If you had a load balancer in the middle of your two ISP links, it picks either one uplink or the other based on SRC/DSP IP, SRC/DST MAC, etc… It never puts some of one flow on one link and some of the flow on the other. What you end up with is the same path cost that you had before you started but now add the load balancer into the path cost.
Home client -- Gig link -- ISP 1
Home client -- Gig link -- ISP 2
I like the idea where you just point some of the clients to one link and the rest to the other.
If you are dead set on doing this, then the idea of using linux distro and the load balancing link provided to above.
Good luck,
The mechanism that accomplished this level of redundancy is when the Internet went down, I plugged into the other connection. Whew… done.
I’m sure you “can” do this. My question would be why do this for a home network?
You never achieve what more then one ISP’s link can give you. Think about this from a path cost perspective. If you had:
Gig link ←>10Mbits/sec link ←> gig link
The path cost is based on the slowest link in the path. You can’t get more then the 10Mbit/sec link will give you even though you have a gig on each side of it.
If you had a load balancer in the middle of your two ISP links, it picks either one uplink or the other based on SRC/DSP IP, SRC/DST MAC, etc… It never puts some of one flow on one link and some of the flow on the other. What you end up with is the same path cost that you had before you started but now add the load balancer into the path cost.
Home client -- Gig link -- ISP 1
Home client -- Gig link -- ISP 2
I like the idea where you just point some of the clients to one link and the rest to the other.
If you are dead set on doing this, then the idea of using linux distro and the load balancing link provided to above.
Good luck,
ProfessorCaos
Honorable
- Oct 3, 2012
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
LMAO Your ALL in the DITCH. THIS IS SO EASY!
GOAL= MORE UPLOAD + LESS LAG
SETUP = two 30mb Broadband connections. with 5.3mb Upload Connections
So THE way the Network Wants to work is Use Fastest Route/HOPS
FACT= Routers LAN TO WAN HAS CAPS LOOK YOURS UP THEN DITCH/TRASH IT> GET A COMPUTER/Server with 3 Gigabyte Lan Cards.
GIGABYTE LAN ALL AROUND ROUTER/SWITCH/HUB/WIERLESS use as routers no dhcp keep subnets the same for faster routing
RUN Linux/windows Server 2008+
Enable RASS Routing remote access. Install NAT / & Understand How Nat Works On server 2008 Nat Should USe 2 Public DHCP/StATIC PUBLIC NETWORKS AND ONE LOCAL PRIVATE NETWORK ROUTING TO INTERNAL HUB /ROUTERS. TELL DHCP OR STATIC IPS TO USE YOUR NEW DNS SERVER to prevent LOOP BACKS
Allow Ports Through the Nat Basic Firewall on each Card.
If your running a Webservice and Need Failover For Upload Load you will need a Static Ip from your ISP and Tell your Network Load Balance to Switch to Second IP when/if the Server Fails to Pull a request
Install A dns Server to Host Ip names resolution Nat Will not like to Round House/Loop Requests.
Good Luck Fun Project
GOAL= MORE UPLOAD + LESS LAG
SETUP = two 30mb Broadband connections. with 5.3mb Upload Connections
So THE way the Network Wants to work is Use Fastest Route/HOPS
FACT= Routers LAN TO WAN HAS CAPS LOOK YOURS UP THEN DITCH/TRASH IT> GET A COMPUTER/Server with 3 Gigabyte Lan Cards.
GIGABYTE LAN ALL AROUND ROUTER/SWITCH/HUB/WIERLESS use as routers no dhcp keep subnets the same for faster routing
RUN Linux/windows Server 2008+
Enable RASS Routing remote access. Install NAT / & Understand How Nat Works On server 2008 Nat Should USe 2 Public DHCP/StATIC PUBLIC NETWORKS AND ONE LOCAL PRIVATE NETWORK ROUTING TO INTERNAL HUB /ROUTERS. TELL DHCP OR STATIC IPS TO USE YOUR NEW DNS SERVER to prevent LOOP BACKS
Allow Ports Through the Nat Basic Firewall on each Card.
If your running a Webservice and Need Failover For Upload Load you will need a Static Ip from your ISP and Tell your Network Load Balance to Switch to Second IP when/if the Server Fails to Pull a request
Install A dns Server to Host Ip names resolution Nat Will not like to Round House/Loop Requests.
Good Luck Fun Project
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
My week with Linux: I'm dumping Windows for Ubuntu to see how it goes- Started by Admin
- Replies: 128
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram