Hi, first post here, I really just need to check something before I hit the 'purchase' button.
At the moment we have two Internet connections via a D-Link DSR-1000N. The most annoying thing about the D-Link is that it allows for load-balancing, OR failover, but not both. There is some traffic we prefer to route via ISP A, and some via ISP B, so both links need to be active. However, in this mode, when one link dies, it won't automatically route everything over the still-functional link. It's a real bugbear of mine.
Anyway, we need to get a third connection and will need a bigger router so I'm considering purchasing either the ZyWall 110 or 310. As far as I can tell from the documentation, ZyXel actually figured out you might want to use as many links as are working. Can somebody confirm the following?
If I have three Internet connections with ISP A, B, and C, I could create:
Trunk 1 - Use ISP A, with ISP B as a backup
Trunk 2 - Use ISB B, with ISP A as a backup
Trunk 3 - Use ISP C, with ISP B as spillover
Trunk 4 - Load-balance between A & B
And then create routing policies so that:
Certain defined traffic uses Trunk 1, other defined traffic used Trunk 2, VoIP using trunk 3, and everything else uses Trunk 4
I really want this to be true, from researching alternatives it seems most routers in this price bracket just offer Load Balancing OR Failover, but not both.
I don't expect to be getting a fourth WAN ever, so I do think the 110 is sufficient in that regard, but are there any other reasons I should consider the 310 instead? The max link speed we get here is 100M
↧