Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 2660 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

SNAT broken by second WAN link?

ThomasBall
Have a PPPoE connection with additional addresses that I use SNAT to sent mail and other services through. Works great on 7.504 (except for the PPPoE issues hopefully fixed in 7.505).

Just added a cable connection and changed it to be the default GW and set it the be the MASQ for the internal network. Idea was to have it for all the PCs and the ADSL for the servers.

All SNAT definitions stopped working!

Did I miss something?

(or does a PPPoE and a Cable DHCP break NAT?)

Tom


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0
    Tom, this must be something really simple; something like not changing the traffic selector in the SNATs.

    Seems like a good opportunity to configure Uplink Balancing...

    Cheers - Bob
  • 0 in reply to BAlfson
    Bob:

    That's what I thought.

    But the hosts did not change and the wan port did not change.

    Somehow the new Masq definition or the GW selection caused the problem.

    ... almost as if removing the one link from being Default GW removed it from being accessed?

    I guess I should go with the newfangled uplink balancing, but I thought I would go with the fundamentals first.

    Now I am perplexed, is what I am trying to do "outside the scope" of the new version?

    Tom
Reply
  • 0 in reply to BAlfson
    Bob:

    That's what I thought.

    But the hosts did not change and the wan port did not change.

    Somehow the new Masq definition or the GW selection caused the problem.

    ... almost as if removing the one link from being Default GW removed it from being accessed?

    I guess I should go with the newfangled uplink balancing, but I thought I would go with the fundamentals first.

    Now I am perplexed, is what I am trying to do "outside the scope" of the new version?

    Tom
Children
No Data