Hi there
I have one machine and 3 xdsl-connections. I want each of them being a
gateway for it's own LAN. Shouldn't that be possible!?
I have succesfully created multiple WANs with one LAN, and thougt that it
would be just about the same setup, but of cause with different manual
outbound nat
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:03 AM, Anders Dahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have one machine and 3 xdsl-connections. I want each of them being a
gateway for it's own LAN. Shouldn't that be possible!?
Sure.
I have succesfully created multiple WANs with one LAN, and thougt that it
would be just
Thanks Chris, I'll try that.
Anders
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Chris
Buechler
Sendt: 17. april 2008 08:07
Til: support@pfsense.com
Emne: Re: [pfSense Support] triple wan to triple lan
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:03 AM, Anders Dahl
Hi Lloyd,
I don't know of a solution for your specific issue, but I thought I'd
at least suggest an alternative that I currently use.
I have this setup:
Network 1
-
- Asterisk Server running with a private IP address - avoids security
issues with SIP registration, since my
Wade Blackwell wrote:
-intelligent load balancing of TCP services (fail a load balanced
node/server out of the pool when the service fails)
the load balancing does detect failed back-ends but only if they cease
listening on their TCP sockets, there's no content checking, so you
can't detect,
Wade,
I'm responding to the list as well so that other folks can get the
benefit of this conversation.
We use pfSense in a CARP cluster configuration for load balancing
because we cannot afford any downtime. Our server pool is tied to a
virtual server address which is actually a CARP type
Sai, It was whatever the default was...auto, I think.
Curtis
- Original Message -
From: sai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: support@pfsense.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2008 1:30:56 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] SOLVED - Strange problem
curtis, what was the
(kid in a candy store),
Right on. So far it's like you are reading my mind, that is exactly
what I was planning based on our needs. I looked for a tutorial on this and
couldn't find one. The CARP I have done and Load balancing I have done. What
I haven't been able to make work is load
Is it possible to have a 3-way CARP setup? I can't seem to find mention
of anyone having one up and running, so I just thought I would check to
see if there was any reason it wouldn't work...
I do see that you have to set up a peer IP, so in a 3 way setup what
would you put there?
Reason
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Dimitri Rodis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to have a 3-way CARP setup? I can't seem to find mention of
anyone having one up and running, so I just thought I would check to see if
there was any reason it wouldn't work…
Yeah, you can. The only catch
On 4/17/08, Chris Buechler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
That's something Scott has discussed changing for 1.3, but
I'm not sure if that'll happen or not.
HEAD has greatly enhanced support for this. I need to look at
backporting it to RELENG_1 sooner or later.
Scott
So really the peer IP option is there for folks who don't have a
dedicated interface, so that the pfsync traffic doesn't flood the
network, is that right?
So, in a 3-way config, do you always have to make configuration changes
on the master? Or can they be made on any of them?
Dimitri Rodis
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Dimitri Rodis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So really the peer IP option is there for folks who don't have a
dedicated interface, so that the pfsync traffic doesn't flood the
network, is that right?
No, it's more for networks with switches that don't play nicely
One last thing:
Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
interface in a CARP config?
Since the IPs assigned directly to the WAN can't be used in a failover
situation (if I understand correctly), I would like to not have to use
an extra public static IP to set up each
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Dimitri Rodis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One last thing:
Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
interface in a CARP config?
No, not at this time.
Since the IPs assigned directly to the WAN can't be used in a failover
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Chris Buechler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Dimitri Rodis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One last thing:
Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
interface in a CARP config?
No, not at this
16 matches
Mail list logo
