Community discussions

 
learnyee
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 8:55 pm

Need help-replacing Peplink Load balancer with Mikrotik-Part2

Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:49 pm

Drawing1.jpg
ok, I actually posted previously on the similar topic but I had got myself into more issue since then.

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=114418

The RB951 essentially was a peplink configured as drop-in mode (meaning the IP:175.x.x.124 is the peplink IP, as replaced by RB951 for POC purposes)

Port1 and Port 4 of RB951 is configured in a bridge, so the packets of 175.x.x.120/29 flows between these 2: ports1 of RB951 <-> RB951 port4 <-> into the existing firewall. and it is tested ok.
Port2 is then configured with a PPPOE client which assigned IP:202.y.y.1/24 (currently connect to another RB running PPPOE server for testing)

It is tested that ping and trace route from the RB951, packet flows without any problem either thru Port1 or Port2 (PPPOE).
No issue with Test Terminal (175.x.x.123) <->RB Port 4 (Bridge) <-> Port 1 (Bridge: IP 175.x.x.124<-> Modem (175.x.x.121) <-> INTERNET and RB (202.y.y.1)<-> Modem (202.y.y.2) <-> INTERNET

But the issue now is:

The INCOMING connection is always at RB951 Port4, which is in a bridge for Port4 and Port2, from my test terminal, I can never reach 202.y.y.1 or 202.y.y.2 or, to enable any packet to NAT (or whatever way) from incoming port 4 to Port2 then go out through the PPPOE link, not a ping or anything, even with a correct routing mark, IP Route, or even make 175.x.x.121 the GW offline.
Tried numerous way I can think of but not working.

Anyone can help in this? How I make the packet goes (or NAT) from the bridge into another port which has a PPPOE running on it?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
mducharme
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:45 pm

Re: Need help-replacing Peplink Load balancer with Mikrotik-Part2

Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:03 am

Hello, your setup is very confusing. I am not clear on what you have the bridge on, one time you say there is a bridge connecting port 1 and port 4, then another time you say there is a bridge connecting port 2 and port 4. Which is it?

I am also unsure of the reason you have those bridges in the first place. Generally you wouldn't load balance and bridge in this way. Port 1 and 2 should probably be independent connections, and port 4 on a different subnet than the other two, not bridged but routed. What you are doing is very strange and not at all intuitive or normal.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests