2

We have two wan data links (with two different telecom providers) going from our central office to a remote location. Each data link currently transfers data from different equipment that are in two distinct subnets. We would like the data links to be redundant and have load balancing. I am thinking of using a Cisco RV042 Dual-WAN router at both the local and the remote site to achieve this. So far, I have been searching online for a similar usage scenario with the Cisco RV042, but all I can find are case scenarios when the two WAN links are for ISPs. Is it ok to use two Cisco RV042s and/or is there a better way?

  • What do your links look like? Are they routed links or are they L2VPN? – Avery Abbott Feb 28 '14 at 3:33
  • They are Layer 2 Links – Anne-of-GG Nov 25 '14 at 0:16
  • Did any answer help you? if so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could provide and accept your own answer. – Ron Maupin Aug 8 '17 at 3:19
2

Is it ok to use two Cisco RV042s

I can't imagine you'll have any issues with using the RV042. Using the built-in load-balancing methods automatically set up a WRR scheduling profile for you. Check out the RV042 User Manual for more information on how to set that up and a snippet of what's happening under the hood.

is there a better way?

There is always a better way, but given the equipment you are using, I think this is your best option without investing too much money and effort into redesigning your network for such a small gain.

In my opinion, this is a good option.

0

If you haven't actually committed to purchasing the Cisco devices, one solution I can think of is to put in a pair of Fortigate devices, then configure them to build a pair of tunnels and perform load balancing between the two tunnels.

With suitable models (the ones with internal storage), you'd even get WAN Optimization feature.

  • 1
    I didn't notice that he wasn't completely sold on the RV042. Good catch. – Ryan Foley Mar 3 '14 at 7:53
  • Could I use EtherChannel? – Anne-of-GG Nov 22 '14 at 13:13
  • @Anne-of-GG you mean, can you connect from your core router to the Fortigate device using EtherChannel? Not sure, never tried that, because in all scenarios I ever experienced, the WAN-side bandwidth is much too low to justify bonding LAN interfaces. – pepoluan Nov 23 '14 at 8:23
  • I was thinking of using EtherChannel with the existing router (with switch module) at the central site, and a normal switch at the remote location. Seems like this is possible to do over WAN links as long as LACP negotiation is configured, since "the local EtherChannel might not be able to detect a remote failure as a direct physical link failure" link. This also increases the time it takes to detect a failure. Besides this, do you see any mayor CONS to this option? – Anne-of-GG Nov 25 '14 at 0:36
  • @Anne-of-GG do the ISPs provide 'raw' MPLS to your sites? Because to do intersite EtherChannel, you need EoMPLS. The EoMPLS will act as the 'virtual pair of cables' connecting the pair of switches. If the ISPs provide an RJ45 drop to your sites (i.e., you're connecting via plain ol' Ethernet to each ISP's router), you can't use EtherChannel. – pepoluan Nov 25 '14 at 4:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.