Dual WAN ( Load Balancing 98:2 as an Alternate to Failover ?)

[adityaparakh]

Hello ,

Ref : Asus AX92U (or other Dual WAN in general)

About the Dual WAN feature.

Primary Broadband : FibreNet (RJ45-Ehternet output directly available from ISP) - Practically Unlimited Data.
Secondary : USB Based (4G SIM Card Mobile Data via Android Phone) - Annual Quota of Data - Always connected to charger and router.

I am trying to have absolutely un-interrupted (zero second down) Internet.
I intend to use it as in the Load Balancing Mode at 98:2.
Why Not 'FailOver' Mode : The momentary delay in changing over is Not acceptable.


My Question is :
If the Primary Broadband fails , will it automatically utilize the full potential of the 4G Sim MobileData.
And revert back to Primary Broadband at 98% Utilization once its back up.
Will there be a disconnect ? How will the functioning be ?

On Normal usage , it will keep consuming 2% of my data usage via the 4G - which is fine.
I am not able to think , why this is not always a better option than FailOver mode.
Is it not in effect : a zero second FailOver ?

 

[Tech9]

All my attempts to use Asuswrt Dual WAN failed, on multiple routers and firmwares. It's not reliable or not working at all. In places I need real Dual WAN I use Cisco RV34x routers. They switch ISPs in Fail Over in 30 seconds (the default, 3 retries x 10 seconds timeout) and almost seamless in Load Balance. Of course, lost connections have to be re-established. The previous Cisco RV32x routers were excellent as well. Super simple to configure and very reliable.

 

[adityaparakh]

All my attempts to use Asuswrt Dual WAN failed, on multiple routers and firmwares. It's not reliable or not working at all. In places I need real Dual WAN I use Cisco RV34x routers. They switch ISPs in Fail Over in 30 seconds (the default, 3 retries x 10 seconds timeout) and almost seamless in Load Balance. Of course, lost connections have to be re-established. The previous Cisco RV32x routers were excellent as well. Super simple to configure and very reliable.

Thanks for the Info. Shall check out the Cisco products. Do they support Internet from a USB source (4G - Android Phone) ?

On the LoadBalancing vs FailOver aspect : Can you please clarify if setting 98:2 Load Balancing help achieve zero second downtime internet.
Not finding a reason to choose , or why anyone , would choose Failover vs LoadBalancing 98:2.

 

[Tech9]

RV32x/34x do have USB ports for 3G/4G modems, but I never had such modem to test. I don't know what 3G/4G modems are compatible with Cisco. I use DSL and Cable connections on 3x RV345 and 1x RV325 routers. They all work in Load Balance mode with approx. 90% real ISP speeds in WAN up/down bandwidth settings. The ratios are different according to the ISPs. You can't have real zero seconds downtime. Connections made to one ISP must be re-established with the other in an event of ISP failure. For example, if you have VoIP application running, it will stop and re-connect. Your Web browsers may hang half way loading a page, you have to re-load. The good thing it happens fast on Cisco and works always. May or may not happen on Asus. Most Asus routers I have tested need the cable physically unplugged to realize the main ISP is lost. The other option is to set Asuswrt Dual WAN with 40+ attempts, but that means you lose Internet for >5 minutes. I'm fine with 30 seconds guaranteed, but not with >5 minutes eventually. Some people report good/acceptable results with Asuswrt and specific USB modems, search the forum for more details.

 

[FernandoF]

Thanks for the Info. Shall check out the Cisco products. Do they support Internet from a USB source (4G - Android Phone) ?

On the LoadBalancing vs FailOver aspect : Can you please clarify if setting 98:2 Load Balancing help achieve zero second downtime internet.
Not finding a reason to choose , or why anyone , would choose Failover vs LoadBalancing 98:2.

I know this is a couple of months old, but I've been experimenting with Load Balance myself as well. At least on Merlin 386.3_2, it's not possible to set 98:2. The highest you can go is 9:1. I wonder if higher numbers could be entered via SSH, but I'm not experienced enough for that...

 

[Oferlaor]

load balancing simply does not work. I had two 100Mbps lines and would constantly get client disconnections as they would switch over from one connection to the other. I ultimately switched over to failover.

 

[FernandoF]

I started with a 1:1 load balance, but later changed it to 9:1 in order to avoid some web pages failing to connect. I also have a few rules for specific devices and IP's, associating them with either the Primary or Secondary WAN. I've learned that rules for the Primary WAN always get processed first, even if they are entered in a different order. The actual sequence can be checked by issuing the command ip rule via SSH.

It seems to be working pretty well now.