Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
xxiii
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:55 am

load balance ignored with equal cost route in rc10

Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:19 pm

Have a router with the following route table entry:
3 ADo  dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 pref-src=xx.yy.zz.50 
        gateway=xx.yy.zz.65,xx.yy.zz.93 interface=1-dsl,2-dsl 
        gateway-state=reachable,reachable distance=110 scope=255 
        target-scope=10 route-tag=0 
However, the router is sending ALL traffic out only the 1-dsl interface.
(and there are currently 1678 connections, so at least a few of them should have picked the alternative path when they were established).

Here is a snapshot statistic, note outbound traffic is only using 1-dsl.


1-dsl
  received-packets-per-second: 150
     receive-drops-per-second: 0
     received-bits-per-second: 1202.2kbps
      sent-packets-per-second: 368
    transmit-drops-per-second: 0
         sent-bits-per-second: 868.0kbps
2-dsl
  received-packets-per-second: 300
     receive-drops-per-second: 0
     received-bits-per-second: 2.3Mbps
      sent-packets-per-second: 0
    transmit-drops-per-second: 0
         sent-bits-per-second: 0bps
This worked fine in 2.9. After rebooting, the situation is the same, except its now routing ALL traffic via 2-dsl, and ignoring 1-dsl. Also, it if matters or not, the route table actually contains many entries (in addition to the default gateway) that all specify 1-dsl,2-dsl as their path.
 
User avatar
tgrand
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:57 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Re: load balance ignored with equal cost route in rc10

Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:24 am

The firewall/Filter component is currently not working properly.
Hotspot does not appear to be working optimally either.

I beleive that anything that relies on the firewall, should be considered broken.

As far as routing... Works great!!!

Other posts idicate that they are currently working on rectifying the filter issues, and also indicate that their intension is to have it fixed n the next RC.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], britgent, GoogleOther [Bot], migod, mtkvvv, sindy and 101 guests