From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   On Sun, 30 Jul 2017 22:15:04 +0100, Stephen   
    wrote:   
      
   >On Sun, 30 Jul 2017 15:40:57 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>I have a router that I think will do load sharing between two internet   
   >>connections. It's an ASUS RT-AC66U. The internet connections are:   
   >>1: Local WISP: Radio on roof feeds through a  Cat 5 ethernet cable to   
   >>the router's WAN connection. Speeds are slow, 3Mbps max. The WISP is   
   >>pretty reliable, if slow.   
   >>2. Hughesnet Gen 5: Dish on roof feeds through another cat 5 cable to   
   >>port 1 on the ASUS.Speed are usually good, up to 25 Mbps The satellite   
   >>service is less reliable, heavy rain (I'm in Houston area) causes loss   
   >>of signal.   
   >>   
   >>The ASUS software recognizes that there is a connection to a WAN on   
   >>each port.   
   >>   
   >>The software gives me the option of setting up as either failover or   
   >>load sharing. I'd prefer Load Sharing, because one or the other   
   >>sometimes gets very slow.   
   >   
   >Whether you use failover or load share, it will only work well if the   
   >router can detect loss of a link and divert traffic.....   
   >>   
   >>There's another complication.... the Hughesnet service is through   
   >>their router. The system "works" with a cat 5  from one of the   
   >>Hughesnet router LAN ports to the ASUS LAN port 1.... but both routers   
   >>are DHCP servers. So far I've seen no problems with this.... but I   
   >>haven't run both connected this way for very long.   
   >   
   >The DHCP servers are in 2 different domains.   
   >   
   >the Hughes "LAN" is treated as a WAN by the Asus, so it is just   
   >working the same way as any other ISP connection with dynamic IP   
   >addresses, even though the Hughes router is running that server   
   >   
   >>   
   >>AM I likely to have problems due to both apparently assigning DHCP   
   >>addresses? I could turn off DHCP serving on the ASUS, but then I think   
   >>the WISP wouldn't be able to serve any computers. I don't see any way   
   >>to turn off DHCP on the Hughesnet router.   
   >>   
   >On the home LAN you should only have the Asus serving DHCP - but that   
   >sounds like the way it is working.   
   >   
   >>Is one or the other mode (Failover or Load sharing) likely to be more   
   >>trouble free? Any advantage to either one?   
   >   
   >The key is detecting when 1 link stops working and diverting sessions.   
   >   
   >Load balancing for a home router has to normally use "per session"   
   >balancing, because the 2 ports it sends traffic out will do address   
   >translation to the ISP assigned address   
   >- so splitting the session traffic means the far end device sees that   
   >as sessions from 2 different devices.   
   >   
   >Load balancing in general only works well if either   
   >- the 2 links have comparable performance and the router just assigns   
   >sessions randomly to either   
   >- the router measures performance in some way (latency or bandwidth   
   >maybe) and allocates sessions in proportion.   
   >   
   >even if load balancing then works, you have a gotcha   
   >- any 1 session may go either way, but will be limited to that WAN   
   >link, so anything that needs performance better than the slower link   
   >is 50% risk of failing depending on allocation   
   >   
   >so failover may be better if 1 link is preferable when both are   
   >working.   
   >   
   >The drawback with failover is you dont use the lower performance link,   
   >so there is some risk it will fail in a way you dont notice until you   
   >need it.......   
   >>   
   >>My local network consists of three computers, a connection to a Dish   
   >>network recorder, a connection to a Roku, and occasional access by a   
   >>couple of tablets and cell phones. Ideally, I'd like to keep   
   >>everything on one LAN, but if this setup with the one router is likely   
   >>to have problems, is it possible to have two LANs, with some sort of   
   >>connections so that the computers in one LAN and communicate with   
   >>those in the other?   
   >   
   >The system just gets more complex with multiple devices and has more   
   >potential states, although "human driven" changeover may be ok :)   
   >- if you can get it to work with 1 router then I would stick with   
   >that.   
   >Stephen Hope stephen_hope@xyzworld.com   
   >Replace xyz with ntl to reply   
      
   Thanks for your replies, you've explained a lot. I'll probably just   
   use one or the other, manually changing between the two depending on   
   traffic and weather.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)