Vigor 2820 - any experiences?

[Inkblot]

I'm looking to get some basic redundancy on the broadband connections at work, my plan is:

2*ADSL connection, 1 from IDNet and one from A.N. Other (Maybe LLU)
1*Broadband modem (Vigor 120 or similar)
1*Vigor 2820 which supports 2 WAN connections and can fail over from the primary to the secondary if the primary drops

The 2820 connects directly to one of the broadband connections (WAN1/ADSL port) and the 120 connects to the other. The 120 is then connected to the 'WAN2' (Ethernet) port on the back of the 2820. If configured correctly the Vigor will push all traffic out via WAN1 but automatically switch to WAN2 if there are any problems - alternatively the dual WAN ports can be used for load-balancing or to increase the total amount of bandwidth available to the user.

The reasoning behind 2 different broadband providers with 1 of them maybe being an LLU provider is to get the data onto different networks at the earliest point - if somebody drives into the street cabinet we are still down but if there is an issue at the exchange I'm hopefully onto seperate infrastructure by that point, does that make sense?

Well, that's what the website suggests anyway, I prefer to ask if anybody has tried this router and if so what the general feedback is

[Rik]

The logic seems right, Inky, though I don't think you can do load balancing without an ISP who supports it.

[DorsetBoy]

I use the Vigor 2820 (non wireless) and have found it to be very reliable. I only use the one Adsl input so cannot help with comments about the use of Wan2.

There is a UK Draytek forum where the staff respond quickly and many of those that sell and install networks using Draytek gear are good at assisting with questions like this , >>> http://www.forum.draytek.co.uk/ <<<

[pctech]

Think its bonding you are thinking of Rik although obviously each WAN link will have its own IP so might present an issue if you are running servers.

Do you have your own AS number Inkblot?

[Rik]

How right you are, Mitch. 

[pctech]

I don't see any problems with what you are proposing Inky provided you have no hosted services that others connect to.

If you do you will probably need to run BGP and obtain an Autonomous System number via RIPE as you will effectively be multi-homing your connection.

The AS number ensure that packets are routed to your network irrespective of which ISP connection you are using.

I'll do a little reading on the Vigor.

[pctech]

If you just want outbound that will be ok but for inbound stuff I don't think it's going to fit the bill.

If you can give me a bit more info about what you want to do I can advise further.

[Inkblot]

Thanks guys, it's primarily outbond that I'm interested in - I'm not expecting any redundancy inbound although thinking about it, there will be an Exchange server sitting on the network...if I set the primary MX to be WAN1 IP and the secondary MX to be WAN2 IP then bingo, failover on Exchange too! (Well, after a fashion anyway ) It goes without saying that both IPs will be static.

The reasoning is that we have a large number of students taking online examinations and we therefore need broadband at all times - a dedicated circuit is far too expensive and in fairness, our existing circuits (With BT/Easynet) have not let us down over the time I have been going in there - 5 years or more at 2 of the sites and 3 years at the others. Oviously if one fails and we habe to restart examinations it's not the end of the world, if we have to wait for a fault to be fixed and that takes 2 days then it's a right pain!

Redundancy is only one reason this setup appeals, with the same hardware I could have the students going out through 1 connection (Using the 120) and the staff going through the other (Using the 2820 with just WAN1 connected) - no redundancy but faster broadband for all, at the moment everything goes down a single 8m connection - exams, web browsing, VPN, RDP, email, etc. and there are times that its slow - not surprisingly! I should be able to get 15m with ADSL2+ so can either use it with redundancy (Faster plus redundancy) or use it as 2 separate circuits (Much faster but no redundancy), the 2820 has an appeal of its own - a bit upmarket from the DG834s we are currently using - nothing wrong with them but in an environment with 200 users its not the best tool for the job!

[pctech]

What you have said will work no problem so no BGP config necessary.

[Technical Ben]

Hope you get it sorted. As said, having 200 people logon at the same time can kill the systems if not setup to take the strain.
I remember being told at work to "go fill in an online questionnaire at exactly 9:00." This was the time the system went live, and the top management and directors insisted it was so important that it was done ASAP. So our managers were really nervous and made sure it was done. What did I do? I sat in my seat and waited for everyone's faces as they realised the system could not take 1200 employees logging in at the same time!

You not looking for anyone to point out obvious flaws are you? They miss them all in my place.  

[asimm.it]

I don't see any problems with what you are proposing Inky provided you have no hosted services that others connect to.

If you do you will probably need to run BGP and obtain an Autonomous System number via RIPE as you will effectively be multi-homing your connection.

The AS number ensure that packets are routed to your network irrespective of which ISP connection you are using.

I'll do a little reading on the Vigor.

If you have access to a good DNS platform you could use hostnames instead of IP's for inbound services and then set some SRV records with different priorities to provide high availability for your services across your 2 connections.

for an example see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRV_record

[Rik]

Welcome to the forum.

The problem with this thread is I never know whether it refers to the router of that name, or the member.

[Ray]

 

[Steve]