|Anonymous | Login||2017-10-22 11:58 CEST|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0001491||Endian Firewall||Network related (VPN, uplinks)||public||2008-11-28 16:54||2009-06-10 14:55|
|Target Version||future||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0001491: "Emergency" Uplink|
|Description||I have two active Uplinks over fixed IP with Ethernet. Also i have a Backup-Uplink with a UMTS UDB Stick.|
Now it would be a nice feature to have a UMTS "Emergency Uplink"
This means for me that the UMTS Link only come up if BOTH other active Uplinks go down.
In this case also all policy based routings have to switch automatically to the umts uplink.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
You can define chains of uplinks. For example:
main > uplink1 > umts uplink
uplink1 > umts uplink
uplink2 > uplink1 > umts uplink
This configuration behaves exactly as you described.
As long as uplink1 is working uplink2 and main direct the traffic through uplink1 if they fail. If uplink1 also fails, all will be directed through umts uplink
Use "start on boot" in order to mark the uplink as "be always up". Use "if uplink fails use xxx" in order to define the respective backup uplink. The trick is that a normal uplink which always need to be up (start on boot) can also be a backup uplink of another uplink.
But this is no solution if i have two uplinks and policy routing.
First uplink for http traffic and second uplink for smtp and vpn.
In your scenario "main - uplink1 - umts as backup" all traffic would be directed to main.
Both active with policy based routing for different services
UMTS Uplink should be "Emergency Uplink"
If main goes down all traffic should go to uplink1 and vice versa.
Only if both (main and uplink1) are down all traffic should go to umts uplink.
Any solution? Your example wouldn´t work for this.
Or am i wrong?
Ah you would like to have uplink1 as backup of main and main as backup of uplink1, but if both are down, umts should be used.
ok, that's not possible.
you can chain the uplinks but you can have only one child on each.
please add this feature to the roadmap
|Can you do this for 2.3 and not "future" ?|
|2008-11-28 16:54||aender||New Issue|
|2008-11-28 16:54||aender||Assigned To||=> peter-endian|
|2008-12-09 21:44||peter-endian||Note Added: 0001854|
|2008-12-10 07:47||aender||Note Added: 0001856|
|2008-12-10 11:12||aender||Note Added: 0001857|
|2008-12-11 14:59||peter-endian||Note Added: 0001866|
|2008-12-11 15:03||aender||Note Added: 0001867|
|2008-12-11 15:07||peter-endian||Target Version||=> future|
|2008-12-11 15:17||aender||Note Added: 0001868|
|2009-06-10 14:55||peter-endian||Assigned To||peter-endian =>|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2012 MantisBT Group|