Hi guys, I want create 60GHz link and have 5GHz link backup and fail over. When both on it will bond both link and final speed will be sum of both. If one link will go down, all will go over remining second link.

Can this be done with bonding as both links have different speed?

Like create EoIP tunnel for each wireless link (one over 60G and second over 5G) than create bonding with this two EoIP tunnels as interfaces and turn on ARP monitoring.

Or another ''better' way like some advaced routing or PCC?

thank fo ideas

Hoi

What kind of throughput do you get over the links?

Hoi

What kind of throughput do you get over the links?

5G about 100-190Mb and 60G about 500Mb

I wouldn't use LACP with links of different characteristics. It can be a nightmare.

It's better to configure them in an active/passive fashion with the 5G link acting as a backup and forwarding packets only if the 60G link fails.

I wouldn't use LACP with links of different characteristics. It can be a nightmare.

It's better to configure them in an active/passive fashion with the 5G link acting as a backup and forwarding packets only if the 60G link fails.

Thanks for reply. But still bonding EoIP tunnels (and use Active backup mode) - is it better way, than have it as two parallel path with different subnets and do some kind of routing, ping gateway, Distance, .. - change GW base on ping to other site of wireless link?

bounding with active backup will switch over in less than 0.3 seconds if 60GHz link is lost

bounding with active backup will switch over in less than 0.3 seconds if 60GHz link is lost

Perfect, sounds like best way. Thank you for answers.

EoIP for each wireless link. Bonding - mode active backup, slaves both EoIP interfaces, Primary 60G EoIP, Link monitoring - ARP and ARP IP targets IP of other site of EoIP on 60G wireless.

What if 60G would go up and down in short intervals. Is there delay in switching back from backup (5G) to main (60G)?
Is it aptions UP/DOWN delay? What are "good" values?
LACP rate - 1s?

bounding with active backup will switch over in less than 0.3 seconds if 60GHz link is lost

Can OSPF do this job too? like setup ospf interface of both router¨s interfaces connected to p2p link and setup network type as peer to peer?

LAN -- eth1 (ospf network type broadcas) ROUTER A eth2 (ospf network type peer to peer) --- wireless mikrotik in brdge ******* wireless mikrotik in brodge --- eth1 (ospf network type peer to peer) ROUTER B eth2 (ospf network type broadcas) ------ other LAN

and setup 60G as cost 1 and 5G as cost 10?

Do you need transparent behavior? I.e. should it be like a bridge/switch?
If not, do not use EoIP but use routing. You can use an autorouting protocol configured for quick switchover (e.g. with BFD).

Even when you do require EoIP, you can use a single EoIP pair and use routing to select the path between them depending on which link is up.

Do you need transparent behavior? I.e. should it be like a bridge/switch?
If not, do not use EoIP but use routing. You can use an autorouting protocol configured for quick switchover (e.g. with BFD).

Even when you do require EoIP, you can use a single EoIP pair and use routing to select the path between them depending on which link is up.

No, I dont need it transparent. it was just idea how to bodn wifi link (to "convert" it to enternets).
OSPF itself would not switch/change routing fast enought then one wireles p2p link die?

You would recommend to setup 2 /30 networks between the routers and run your favorite routing protocol.
Combine it with BFD to make it aware of connection loss a lot quicker than OSPF or BGP do by default.

Hi,

Why not try to change the priority on the 60Ghz port and also on the 5ghz port with RSTP?
60ghz priority 128
5ghz priority 96

If link break on 60ghz then the traffic will go through the 5ghz, it requires to have two switch between each radio.

You would recommend to setup 2 /30 networks between the routers and run your favorite routing protocol.
Combine it with BFD to make it aware of connection loss a lot quicker than OSPF or BGP do by default.

Btw what is advantage of using /30 network instead of /24? Less hosts, lest broadcasts? Not saving IPs much as each /30 eat 4IPs ...
What if there is 4 host on p2p - site A, wireless build-in mikrotik, wireless build-in mikrotik, site B. Use /29?

Yes to include the management of the WiFi use /29
Well it is of course also possible to use a /24 but what is important is that you should use a separate network for each of the links and not put these things in a bridge as so many people do.
So on each router you take out 2 ports from the normal bridge and setup separate networks on these and use them for the link.

Yes to include the management of the WiFi use /29
Well it is of course also possible to use a /24 but what is important is that you should use a separate network for each of the links and not put these things in a bridge as so many people do.
So on each router you take out 2 ports from the normal bridge and setup separate networks on these and use them for the link.

Oh OK. Thank you. Yes, I understand this part. Each p2p wireless link own subnet and routed port on both sites - not bridged. Just in most examples and tutorials people use /30 for connections between routers (2 hosts) and I was wondering if there is any "technical" reason or just saving subnets/IP randges (use one /24 cutted into small /30 for all this "short links").

Hi,

Why not try to change the priority on the 60Ghz port and also on the 5ghz port with RSTP?
60ghz priority 128
5ghz priority 96

If link break on 60ghz then the traffic will go through the 5ghz, it requires to have two switch between each radio.

Thank you, sounds more complicated than OSPF with BFD I see RSTP settings only on bridge, not ether ports