So I just got a new MikroTik RouterBOARD RB/1100AHx2 (preparing for Google fiber, speed wise). I have two ISPs (one Static IP) and another DHCP (for time being). I have a LAN of 192.168.254.x - 255
I would like to FAILOVER to the Second DHCP ISP. No load balancing required.
I have tried to setup but just getting confused on routes. I am using Winbox but I can do cli if that’s the way to go.
Basically I have gone into Winbox and setup Eth1 for the LAN (with DHCP working). Hands out LAN IP and default IP is gone on that interface.
Router: 192.168.254.1
DHCP scope - 192.168.254.100 - 200
I have done ETH4 (gigabit interface) for ISP1 with the Static. ISP2 would go on eth5 but haven’t gotten that far. Question is do I have to enter it with cidr “/” in Winbox for WAN IPs? Also in addition I need to forward ports but we can get to that later. I think just an example would get me through. Problem is they need to be forwarded on both ISPs interfaces. In the routes section I am getting “unreachable” but that’s because it’s not onsite, just trying to get it ready to plug and “pray”.
I have looked through the forums and will continue to do so as I gain some knowledge everytime I look. Not a newbie on routers (Sonicwalls, etc) but could use a little assistance. Is there anyone out there that I could “hire” for what I think is a simple setup. I wouldn’t need much of anyone’s time just about 1 hour I think.
Usually, the ISP wouldnt get you to configure any IP based stuff on your end, they’d either hand off to you via DHCP, PPPoE or IPoE.
Basically, as this happens, for both PPPoE and DHCP client you can set a ‘distance’ on the default route that it brings in, to make your primary connections work if available, you set it to a lower distance, 1 being the lowest, 0 reserved for some occasions.
If/when you get going, feel free to email me joe dot goldman at gmail dot com (avoiding spam bots) and I’d be happy to lend a hand and some examples.
Yea my ISP makes you program it on your interfaces (ISP1 for static). True old school way.
Make it seem so easy but I am sure that’s not the only thing I will need to do. Anyone want to make a few extra bucks and give a little remote assistance? I know it’s a weird request but I learn by doing and I would really want someone to know what they are doing by following a long
My last post (topic: 12 hours to post) was done quickly. Doesn’t look I am restricted to post anymore. Yea likely for spam. joegoldman offered to help but we are opposite sides of the world. Hehe. I sleep when he is working. His weekend is coming up so he might contact me back.
I have just implemented a RB1100AHx2 on a Google fiber connection. Oh what fun. They required us to set up the WAN interface as VLAN 2. We were also required to give the WAN interface a Public Google IP address and route the customer assigned public IP addresses through it. By setting up a bridge on the WAN and using src-nat we were able to get it working.
The issue that we are running into is the throughput on the RB1100AHx2. The Google port (WAN) is on eth2, the LAN is on eth5, and the IP phone system is on port 6. Looking at the Block Diagram for the RB1100AHx2 ports 1 - 5 are on switch 1 and port 6 - 10 are on switch 2 port which means that each switch is aggregated to the CPU. This limits the total throughput to the Google connection. When we did a speed test through the Google supplied router (allows customer only private IP addresses) we get close to 1 GB results. When we remove the Google fiber router (required to use the Google supplied public IP addresses) and do a speed test to Googles’ local speedtest server it shows the client getting 250 MB by 10 MB. We are looking into any restrictions that Google may have on the MT MAC or IP address. After doing a little research on the Mikrotik router throughput, it looks like to get this highest throughput you need to use ports that are directly connected to the CPU or possibly only use on of the switch ports. Am I looking at this incorrectly?
We are looking at getting a CCR1009-8G-1S instead.
What are your thoughts?
Can’t you just move your fiber WAN to ethter11 which is directly connected to the CPU?
On my RB100AHx2 I get 900+Mbps for a 1G fiber link using ether11 (70 filters, 15 mangle rules + masquerading, load at abt. 85%).
