Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 27 replies
  • Subscribers 3 subscribers
  • Views 30047 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

Multipath Rules vs Static Routing (Policy Routes) ?

UweT
Dear Experts,

We have 3x Internet access lines using Uplink Balancing.

We are using services for online file storage accessed by WebDAV (HTTPS) mostly.

I want do force all the traffic on HTTPS to destination i.e. "PROVIDER.com" to go over our dedicated line (same upload and download), let's call it "line1".

What is the best strategy in performance regarding the Astaro overload? And what is the difference in between?:

a) using Interfaces&Routing > Static Routing > Policy Rules (Any>Any>HTTPS>provider.com>interface "line1")

or

b) using Interfaces&Routing > Interfaces > Multipath Rules (Any>HTTPS>provider.com>line1)

Thank you in advance!
Uwe


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0
    Hi all, am I reading correctly that you are saying that in the event an uplink interface goes down (one of our two ISPs), that the static and policy routes associated with that interface remain in effect and do not get invalidated?

    Why is that the case?  If it is, it sounds like our only option for proper failover is to use multipath?
Reply
  • 0
    Hi all, am I reading correctly that you are saying that in the event an uplink interface goes down (one of our two ISPs), that the static and policy routes associated with that interface remain in effect and do not get invalidated?

    Why is that the case?  If it is, it sounds like our only option for proper failover is to use multipath?
Children
No Data
Unfiltered HTML