Hi,
question regarding load-balancing on a 2860ac please?

Ok, I am not overly technical so I will try explain the scenario and hope i make sense

I have a broadband line which I pay for myself and one broadband line paid for by my business. Basically I have two routers connected to BT Infinity(VDSL).

On my private line I have my Draytek 2860ac and on the Business line I have a Linksys WRT1900ACS connected via a Draytek 130 VDSL Modem.

Currently both routers reside on a single subnet in the RFC 1918 Range 192.168.1.x.

The Draytek has a default gateway of 192.168.1.254 and the Linksys is 192.168.1.1.

All the devices are connected across an Ethernet Network, apart from Wireless devices off course like iPads and phones etc.

Both have DHCP Enabled, but only distribute a small range of 20 addresses which do not overlap. So kind of a very bad load-balance

If a client requests an IP Address lease, which ever router answers first, the client uses that router as it's default gateway.

If I was to disable the DHCP Scope on the Linksys, could I enable load-balancing between the two routers? I am concerned there could be double NAT issues, but only if the secondary connection does not use routing to get to the Linksys I am guessing?

Would I have to use WAN2, or use another LAN port for the connectivity.

Just wanted to know if I am walking into a dead end solution before I start or if this type of solution is feasible?

Thanks in advance for any help or advice

Thanks
G

I think you're being generous calling it "a very bad load-balance"

1. Do you care what traffic goes down which WAN connection?
2. Do you need the Linksys at all ? Why not just have the Vigor2860 and Vigor130 on WAN2 ?

admin wrote: I think you're being generous calling it "a very bad load-balance"

1. Do you care what traffic goes down which WAN connection?
2. Do you need the Linksys at all ? Why not just have the Vigor2860 and Vigor130 on WAN2 ?

1. I would like some separation if possible yes.
2. The secondary line and the draytek 130 are to far away to connect directly. I have thought about how I would connect direct to the 130 modem, but it is not an easy fix and would be difficult ti implement without going into too much detail

Also just a thought? If I connected the Ethernet port of the 130 to the network via the Ethernet port, could I use WAN2 to send PPoE authentication to that device or does it have to be directly connected?

Yeah load-balancing via DHCP and pure luck is not the best.

anyone please??

Plug the Vigor 130 into WAN2 port on the 2860.

Configure WAN2 with the necessary authentication details for your BT 'business' line. Retain a single DHCP pool

You can then configure load balancing, specific routes for data types (say email sending always goes via WAN2, web browsing by WAN1, etc). Do you need to keep the traffic from business devices over the business line, and personal traffic over the personal line, or can it be a free for all?

You could just have it pick up WAN2 if WAN1 goes down, but that would be a rather wasteful of available bandwidth.... I have my 2925 configured to fall over to a 3g USB Vodafone modem (WAN3)

Thanks mbames,
excellent information, really appreciated.

The issue I think is utilising WAN 2. The reason I state this is because some of my Network operates over Powerline HomePlugs which work very well.

If I connect the Draytek 130 to the Powerline downstairs and enable WAN2 I get a connection. So I could easily use this solution.

What I have discovered off course is any other device that was connected to the Powerline devices (network) is now isolated if i connect the powerline to WAN 2, as they were using the 192.168.1.x network which was shared across the home. Once WAN 2 is deployed it does not appear to allow any other devices to talk through it? So anything on the Powerline network can no longer reach a Default gateway of either 192.168.1.1 or 192,168.1.254. Unless I find a way to run a dedicated CAT 6 cable between WAN2 downstairs to my Lounge and connect to my Draytek 130, I cannot see a way round this??

Thanks for the suggestions around splitting the work and home traffic, if I get a working solution I will look at using something like that.

thanks
Gary