11-11-2013 03:09 PM
I have two WAN connections: A dedicated 48/24 Mbit over cable (WAN1) and a residental shared 300/300 Mbit (WAN2), which I help managing.
I have some services (TV & music) provided by the cable company that requires me to come from my cable connection, so I always want outbound connections to go out of WAN1, with the only exception being, if it's down.
But I also need to be able to route to the specific subnet on WAN2, which is directly known by the RV320, to administrate the residental router on that subnet.
However...
It sounded like a simple task to me and was exactly what I bought the RV320 for, but I simply can't figure out how to make this work.
Any help, please? Thanks!
Solved! Go to Solution.
11-15-2013 08:14 AM
Protocol binding seems like it would be best to handle this, I think. You can specify 0.0.0.0 for all IPs and you can add a new service with whatever port range you want for ports.
I recall a way to set certain IP ranges to certain wan ports on my rv016. Is there an option like that on the rv320? This option seems like it would solve your problem.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
11-15-2013 08:14 AM
Protocol binding seems like it would be best to handle this, I think. You can specify 0.0.0.0 for all IPs and you can add a new service with whatever port range you want for ports.
I recall a way to set certain IP ranges to certain wan ports on my rv016. Is there an option like that on the rv320? This option seems like it would solve your problem.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
11-15-2013 05:02 PM
Thanks for your reply, Samir.
Well, I couldn't use 0.0.0.0 (at least for source start).
I created two protocol bindings, both using the "All Traffic" standard service, and having a source IP range of my LAN network range.
First rule specified the residental network as the destination, which is only connected to WAN2, which I of course linked to WAN2.
For the second rule, I specified 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255, linking it to WAN1.
It seems to do what I want - always use WAN1 for outbound connections, but still failover to WAN2, if WAN1 goes down.
Thanks!
11-15-2013 05:09 PM
Sweet! Glad I was able to be of some help.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
08-24-2014 10:44 AM
Hi again,
I'm getting a bit tired of this router...
While your suggestion generally works, the connection to the network attached to WAN2 is unstable and experience frequent drop-outs.
This is particular evident when connecting via RDP to a virtual machine on the network, or use VMWare vSphere Client to manage the host, both requiring a continuos connection.
Seems like a bug to me - any chance of getting a fix for this, Cisco?
This, and other bugs, pretty much renders my expensive home router useless, for the purpose it was bought for :(
08-29-2014 11:07 AM
08-29-2014 03:49 PM
I'm sorry to say, but I have tried three different versions - from the current as of now and the last two versions. Same issue.
Also, site-to-site VPN is unstable to a degree where's it's utterly unusable, but that's a topic for a different thread.
I'm very disappointed with this router and my RV220W, and I honestly don't know why Cisco but their brand on them, when they're so far from Cisco quality.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide