Draytek router (need to buy)

[Caged]

^ also that. I could potentially see the benefit of load balancing ADSL if that was your only broadband option, but it's not going to give you much resiliency as it will likely go down the same cable. It might protect you from a DSLAM card failure or the failure of one of your ADSL modems but that's about it.

Are you currently having issues with ADSL reliability? What are they? What's your aim?

 

[bitsNbobs]

I know a lot about networking, I'm not convinced you have a clue however.

Disable DHCP, lmao.

I do not not care if you are convinced the image i uploaded and explained what was going on came from this website......
www.abptech.com/ (right click it and view the image to see for yourself its from that site)

Id trust an organisation like that which specialises in IP technology distribution knows how to do things better than you think you know. Or indeed ever will.

No idea why you think disabling DHCP is funny either, nobody with a network decent in size uses that.

LMAO x-infinite.

My mind is blown by all of the above bits n bobs (get it???)

DSL to DSL failover is easily achieved by a 2830N and an additional 120 modem connected to WAN2.

The question you need to ask though is that if resiliency is "key", why are you giving a single fail point to BT? A pole could get hit by a bus, a cab could get flooded or an exchange could go out. Your DSL>DSL would then be useless unless your lines are routed through different exchanges (doubtful).

For a "worthwhile" failover I would look into 3G, Fixed wireless or Satellite to keep things going in case of a DSL outage.

The poster already has 2 ADSL (hes kinda made his choice). What i suggested would be the best way to make use of them both (OR RATHER best way to give options on how you can use them both).

YOUR suggestion right back at the beginning of the thread of "a 2830N and an additional 120 modem connected to WAN2." would have course also work and be a solution. Thats pretty much what visibleman posted as a diagram if the poster needs that to understand also

I agree if the phone pole miraculously blew/got knocked over though or a cab got flooded he would be screwed, not much i or we can do about that now he has already choose 2 ADSL lines. I just gave the best solution to what he has and what he asked for. For true resiliency then yes something like a 3G backup solution would be a good idea, but he doesnt (As far as we know) have that. Your idea and mine would work just fine though with what hes got both entirely viable

^ also that. I could potentially see the benefit of load balancing ADSL if that was your only broadband option, but it's not going to give you much resiliency as it will likely go down the same cable. It might protect you from a DSLAM card failure or the failure of one of your ADSL modems but that's about it.

Are you currently having issues with ADSL reliability? What are they? What's your aim?

The same cable? what on earth are you talking about he has 2 phone lines, Do you mean the same bunch of pairs running to the exchange? Otherwise if he lost one phone line its unlikely to affect the other. Load balancing means he could use one or the other or both. It gives the most options for what he has.

For him to lose both it would likely affect more than him it would likely affect a whole segment of his street if it were a pole issue (probably a dozen homes all out if the pole got knocked out) or if it were a cabinet issue that will affect over 200 people. (standard cabinet has 288 lines).

It will not protect him from DSLAM "FAILURE" either, if the DSLAM "FAILS" that will take more than just his lines out. In fact him being ADSL and thus the card is at the exchange not the cabinet it will take out hundreds if that TOTALLY FAILS......... As opposed to port failure which is probably what you meant which can affect a single line. (again leaving his other line working).

His aim from his original post and 2 follow ups is quite clear. Maybe you should come up with some viable alternatives you have had no suggestions of your own. Then again i doubt ideas are your strong point.

 

[Sin_Chase]

The poster already has 2 ADSL (hes kinda made his choice). What i suggested would be the best way to make use of them both (OR RATHER best way to give options on how you can use them both).

YOUR suggestion right back at the beginning of the thread of "a 2830N and an additional 120 modem connected to WAN2." would have course also work and be a solution. Thats pretty much what visibleman posted as a diagram if the poster needs that to understand also

I agree if the phone pole miraculously blew/got knocked over though or a cab got flooded he would be screwed, not much i or we can do about that now he has already choose 2 ADSL lines. I just gave the best solution to what he has and what he asked for. For true resiliency then yes something like a 3G backup solution would be a good idea, but he doesnt (As far as we know) have that. Your idea and mine would work just fine though with what hes got both entirely viable



The same cable? what on earth are you talking about he has 2 phone lines, Do you mean the same bunch of pairs running to the exchange? Otherwise if he lost one phone line its unlikely to affect the other. Load balancing means he could use one or the other or both. It gives the most options for what he has.

For him to lose both it would likely affect more than him it would likely affect a whole segment of his street if it were a pole issue (probably a dozen homes all out if the pole got knocked out) or if it were a cabinet issue that will affect over 200 people. (standard cabinet has 288 lines).

It will not protect him from DSLAM "FAILURE" either, if the DSLAM "FAILS" that will take more than just his lines out. In fact him being ADSL and thus the card is at the exchange not the cabinet it will take out hundreds if that TOTALLY FAILS......... As opposed to port failure which is probably what you meant which can affect a single line. (again leaving his other line working).

His aim from his original post and 2 follow ups is quite clear. Maybe you should come up with some viable alternatives you have had no suggestions of your own. Then again i doubt ideas are your strong point.

Redundancy and Load Balancing. They are very different objectives.

Redundancy is aiming to create the most resilient environment that carries the least risk. Two DSL lines, on the same physical copper (effectively), likely going to the same exchange, with the same or different provider(s) might as well be 1 single line. Largely useless for redundancy purposes. The sort of failures experienced with DSL are usually provider end point (Auth, Infrastructure faults etc) or client end point and using multiple lines really is not a good protection against this. Rarely it will be a last mile fault and and in those instances whether both of your lines are affected or not is largely pot luck.

Even for load balancing this is somewhat a worthless endeavour. You will not escape contention and it's really only a viable solution when you can only achieve poor speeds on a line and bonding a few meets your bandwidth goals.

If you want true redundancy then using 3G/4G or similar as a fail-over connection is far more likely to survive an outage.

The OP specifies the internet in the area is rocky. If 1 ADSL line is rocky, the other one is going to be also. The likelihood is he will have just as much downtime with added complexity.

ADSL line for large throughput usage when it's up and a 3G backup for bare-bones connectivity when it's not would likely serve the OP much better. There are already 2 ADSL lines installed seemingly, quite why - who knows.

To be fair - Your suggestion was hugely complex, complicated and worst of all - fragmented. Wireless all over the place on independent devices and in the wrong segment of the network, for someone who has rocky internet the last thing they want is a hugely complex fragmented solution.

 

[Caged]

No idea why you think disabling DHCP is funny either, nobody with a network decent in size uses that.

Quoting this for posterity. Thanks for the breakfast laugh.

His aim from his original post and 2 follow ups is quite clear. Maybe you should come up with some viable alternatives you have had no suggestions of your own. Then again i doubt ideas are your strong point.

A 2830 with a Vigor 120 modem would be the cheapest way of achieving this in DrayTek-land.

But y'know, keep sperging if you like.

 

[bitsNbobs]

Redundancy and Load Balancing. They are very different objectives.

Redundancy is aiming to create the most resilient environment that carries the least risk. Two DSL lines, on the same physical copper (effectively), likely going to the same exchange, with the same or different provider(s) might as well be 1 single line. Largely useless for redundancy purposes. The sort of failures experienced with DSL are usually provider end point (Auth, Infrastructure faults etc) or client end point and using multiple lines really is not a good protection against this. Rarely it will be a last mile fault and and in those instances whether both of your lines are affected or not is largely pot luck.

Even for load balancing this is somewhat a worthless endeavour. You will not escape contention and it's really only a viable solution when you can only achieve poor speeds on a line and bonding a few meets your bandwidth goals.

If you want true redundancy then using 3G/4G or similar as a fail-over connection is far more likely to survive an outage.

The OP specifies the internet in the area is rocky. If 1 ADSL line is rocky, the other one is going to be also. The likelihood is he will have just as much downtime with added complexity.

ADSL line for large throughput usage when it's up and a 3G backup for bare-bones connectivity when it's not would likely serve the OP much better. There are already 2 ADSL lines installed seemingly, quite why - who knows.

To be fair - Your suggestion was hugely complex, complicated and worst of all - fragmented. Wireless all over the place on independent devices and in the wrong segment of the network, for someone who has rocky internet the last thing they want is a hugely complex fragmented solution.

I agree for "Redundancy" 2 ADSL lines are not the best..... But thats what he has so as much as we agree it makes no difference.

My solution you may feel is complicated, its clearly not though the example diagram is exactly how you load balance is done and while it may look complicated anyone that can configure a network could set it up easily. Well most could except for the new puppy i have following me, speaking of which........

Quoting this for posterity. Thanks for the breakfast laugh.

The only laugh is you that clearly thinks DHCP is a good idea, clearly you have never configured a network.

1) If DHCP goes down you lose all allocated IP addresses.
2) Man in the middle attack from someone controlling DHCP leases/time frames. (not that you understand what could happen with that)
3) Some services require static IP addresses (domain controllers as a simple example for you).

There is plenty more but ive probably already confused you.... Stick to your little 4/8 port device and never touch anything serious.

A 2830 with a Vigor 120 modem would be the cheapest way of achieving this in DrayTek-land.
But y'know, keep sperging if you like.

And as i said and underlined.....

Maybe you should come up with some viable alternatives you have had no suggestions of your own. Then again i doubt ideas are your strong point.

TWO people suggested that idea before you nodded and agreed... Those people were...

visibleman with post number 4... http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27639440&postcount=4

and

Steveocee with post number 5... http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27639707&postcount=5

That in even the land of the stupid equates to that idea NOT being your own... You understand how that works i trust, they came up with it BEFORE you.

Obviously the underlined bit i should had also put in size 72 font, maybe that would have helped you.

Feel free to prove me wrong with your own ideas on the subject rather than just dismissing those you do not comprehend.

 

[Caged]

lol

Maybe before you become a living breathing example of the Dunning–Kruger effect you should learn what DHCP snooping is and how it is used, what clustered DHCP services provide, and what static leases are.

There's a lot that I know, and a lot that I don't know - but at least I know that. My strengths lie in the areas I'm currently calling you out on, otherwise I wouldn't be doing it. Your attitude is unfortunately common in this industry and gives everyone a bad name.

 

[nightmare99]

No idea why you think disabling DHCP is funny either, nobody with a network decent in size uses that.

WTF seriously?

 

[tribz]

Dunning–Kruger effect

The wiki on this made for a great mid morning coffee read, thanks

 

[visibleman]

diagram is basically what i suggested...

No, you're suggesting that Mason64 should use three routers which is simply bad advice, as pointed out by a handful of users, and not the proper method of doing it, ie - using a single router.

...nobody with a network decent in size uses that.

They do.


Mason64 - Any particular reason you want to stick with Draytek as there's likely to be devices (can't think of anything off the top of my head) that are better suited to this (dual-ADSL router in a single box)?

 

[Caged]

I'm presuming the OP is comfortable with a DrayTek configuration and features, and from a cursory glance around there doesn't appear to be a dual-ADSL product in this sort of product range. If you wanted two modems in one box then you'd be looking at something with WICs.

The only dual-ADSL router I've seen lately was whatever Be* used to use for their bonded service, which was a Comtrend product IIRC.

 

[LordBarrass]

Guys, Mason64 has come on here for help not to see a lot of back and forth arguments over ideas. Lets keep this civil and offer some great advice like I know you guys can.

 

[bitsNbobs]

lol

Maybe before you become a living breathing example of the Dunning–Kruger effect you should learn what DHCP snooping is and how it is used, what clustered DHCP services provide, and what static leases are.

There's a lot that I know, and a lot that I don't know - but at least I know that. My strengths lie in the areas I'm currently calling you out on, otherwise I wouldn't be doing it. Your attitude is unfortunately common in this industry and gives everyone a bad name.

Insults from someone that has clearly failed the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory do not mean much either.

Guys, Mason64 has come on here for help not to see a lot of back and forth arguments over ideas. Lets keep this civil and offer some great advice like I know you guys can.

I believe that is what occurred up until a certain individual made it about agreeing and disagreeing with others. Not a good thing especially when a reasonably new user here like myself sees it and had nothing but a suggestion to the OP and tried to help.

Ive only been here a month and have until this point been nothing but helpful and civil to people on this forum.

Thank you for stepping in.

PS is there a function on here which i may have missed which allows you to IGNORE certain individuals????

 

[Caged]

It's a discussion forum, we were discussing your proposal. You flipped your lid and started calling people stupid before developing a victim complex. If your way of coping is to put people on an ignore list then click here.

 

[visibleman]

Guys, Mason64 has come on here for help not to see a lot of back and forth arguments over ideas. Lets keep this civil and offer some great advice like I know you guys can.

I think it's all well being civil but it's not surprising that some of the replies are a little 'short' when a user continues to offer bad advice and blindly refuses to acknowledge that when users who are extremely knowledgeable in the subject and deal with networks that are vastly more complex than what's in the OP point out the issues.

Either way, the thread has massively derailed so hopefully Mason64 can sift through it and pick out the worthy parts.

 

[bitsNbobs]

It's a discussion forum, we were discussing your proposal. You flipped your lid and started calling people stupid before developing a victim complex. If your way of coping is to put people on an ignore list then click here.

NOPE you were the one that started the personal insulting and flame bait with.....
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27645385&postcount=16
then with the "not convinced you have a clue" remark. http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27649997&postcount=19

Ive not called any individual stupid anywhere. I had not even used the word stupid until this post http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27651707&postcount=25 which is several after all your baiting.
It clearly does not call anyone or you stupid. Unless you feel you live in the land of the stupid in which case i can only apologise about that.

You clearly flame baited for a response. Ignored now until obviously you switch to another account and quote your posts to get them to show up. I assume that is your next "idea".

I think it's all well being civil but it's not surprising that some of the replies are a little 'short' when a user continues to offer bad advice and blindly refuses to acknowledge that when users who are extremely knowledgeable in the subject and deal with networks that are vastly more complex than what's in the OP point out the issues.

Either way, the thread has massively derailed so hopefully Mason64 can sift through it and pick out the worthy parts.

I agree thats why the image and idea i provided, as pointed out is from an organisation...
www.abptech.com who specialises in IP technology distribution...
http://www.abptech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Vigor-2920n-load-balancing-1.png

They are indeed "knowledgeable in the subject and deal with networks that are vastly more complex". I trust they know better having a business in it than armchair critics.

 

[Ev0]

There's really little to no difference between the diagram from 'ABPTech' and the others showing the 2830 plus modem config as well as Sin_Chases's, just take one of the modems as being built into the router in the ABPTech diagram and it's the same thing.

No one is disputing that though if I'm understanding it right, what people are discussing though is the fact that outside of the abptech diagram you are advocating to use wireless access points at the modem location as a means of load balancing/spreading wireless coverage which will arguably complicate things for your average user.

You really want all that stuff on the internal side of the 'main' router to make things simpler.

So no one I can see is necessarily arguing against those pillars of the networking community that are ABPTech, more that they have issue with the extra stuff that's been suggested on top of their basic config.

I may well be wrong but it's just how I've read it, everyone has said pretty much the same thing (have two modems going into the router, just in one example one modem is already built in).

Fwiw if we're talking about the expertise of VADs, I have found after dealing with a few from the vendor side they often don't offer so much of the V in vad themselves, often just coming to the vendor for help when they get a customer asking for something End of the day they are just a distributor of IP related kit to resellers and the like.

 

[bitsNbobs]

...
No one is disputing that though if I'm understanding it right, what people are discussing though is the fact that outside of the abptech diagram you are advocating to use wireless access points at the modem location as a means of load balancing/spreading wireless coverage which will arguably complicate things for your average user.

No you load balance at the load balance router in the diagram. What i added was if they also wanted they could use the 2 wireless devices if they needed to in a bridge to expand wireless coverage. Doing so will obviously not allow them to have the load balancing features at the same time.

The diagram i posted gives them far more options on how to use their connections both when it comes to wired or wireless, its cheaper and has fallover (SOMETHING ELSE IT WAS ACCUSED OF NOT HAVING) if one connection fails... Its clearly explained...
http://www.abptech.com/blog/draytek-2920n-automatic-load-balancing-configuration

 

[Caged]

You're not describing what you're linking to though. Nobody here is failing to understand what is explained in that link, it's what has been suggested several times in this thread.

If you have two ADSL routers with wireless access points integrated and you connect a LAN port on these two routers into a second load balancing routers WAN ports, then you have three subnets with no routing between them, and are double-NATing the load balanced subnet. You'd also have to connect to the wireless network that wasn't connected to the ADSL connection that was offline at the time, because there's no way to achieve load balancing on Wi-Fi devices using the sorts of devices that you advocated in your post. And with DHCP disabled you'd have to manually readdress your devices whenever you changed Wi-Fi network.

It's added complication for a very small monetary saving over the DrayTek router plus another DrayTek modem option.

 

[Danny091]

Why would you use the wireless devices in that diagram for wireless when the aim is to load balance and fail over? Connecting to one or the other defeats the point as the wireless is being broadcast before the load balancing even takes place.

Also the two routers would have to be running in bridge mode rather than router mode or you will get Double NAT and have a huge headache if you need to open ports. Point 8 in the document you linked even shows that they are running in bridge mode as you are using the load balancer to make the PPPoE connection so that the true ip is at the load balancer, this means that the wireless on the routers would be disabled.


Op would be much simpler to just get a router that has a modem and WAN port that allows balancing / fail over and connecting another modem to the WAN port and letting it do its thing of the top of my head i can only think of the asus' that do this but i am sure all the other main routers in that price range do too. I think this is becoming unnecessarily complicated..

 

[Ev0]

No you load balance at the load balance router in the diagram. What i added was if they also wanted they could use the 2 wireless devices if they needed to in a bridge to expand wireless coverage. Doing so will obviously not allow them to have the load balancing features at the same time.

The diagram i posted gives them far more options on how to use their connections both when it comes to wired or wireless, its cheaper and has fallover (SOMETHING ELSE IT WAS ACCUSED OF NOT HAVING) if one connection fails... Its clearly explained...
http://www.abptech.com/blog/draytek-2920n-automatic-load-balancing-configuration

As said, yes the diagram clearly explains what everyone else has been suggesting in the thread, it's this addition of some wireless capability at the modem locations that's causing the issues that people have with the solution which is not present in the ABPTech link.

All the diagrams in the thread are basically the same thing, the only difference with what you are saying is that if you used wireless modem/routers at the modem location you could add additional wireless capability that when in a bridging mode would expand the range of the wireless network.

I'll agree with others that setting it up like that will just get messy all round but yeah you could do that if you really wanted/needed to.

First thing I'd ask the OP though is whether wireless is even a consideration in his requirements, or if he has any issues with wireless coverage to warrant the extra complication. As it stands wireless has not even been mentioned nor any issues with current coverage, you'd be much better off just adding some wireless APs the 'right' side of the load balanced router if that was the case.

As it stands though I'd have thought a 2830n would provide adequate wireless coverage on it's own to negate the need for anything extra.

There's also this link if anyone wants more pretty pictures from a source that should be at least as knowledgeable as ABPTech http://www.draytek.co.uk/information/our-technology/failover

I think this is becoming unnecessarily complicated..

Dear god yes, lets leave wireless out of this for now as it's not necessarily even relevant!