Uncapped 1meg + 4meg capped?

M

maxx69

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
My 4Mbps Adsl account is just so slow when doing large downloads that I've resorted to scheduling large downloads to run during the night. Now I'm thinking of downgrading to a 1Mbps account for large scheduled downloads and having a capped 4Mbps account for everything else.

i.e. One 4Mbps Telkom line with 2 separate accounts.

What are your thoughts around this?
 
maxx69 said:
My 4Mbps Adsl account is just so slow when doing large downloads that I've resorted to scheduling large downloads to run during the night. Now I'm thinking of downgrading to a 1Mbps account for large scheduled downloads and having a capped 4Mbps account for everything else.

i.e. One 4Mbps Telkom line with 2 separate accounts.

What are your thoughts around this?
Click to expand...

Http , ftp , nntp or torrents?
 
Use a Mikrotik router (something like the 750) that has two PPPoE accounts - 1 x 1Mbps uncapped and 1 x Capped account. Set rules that sends all torrents, ftp and other heavy stuff to the uncapped. HTTP, HTTPS and email goes to the capped account. I use this at the office and it rocks.
 
Superspeed said:
Use a Mikrotik router (something like the 750) that has two PPPoE accounts - 1 x 1Mbps uncapped and 1 x Capped account. Set rules that sends all torrents, ftp and other heavy stuff to the uncapped. HTTP, HTTPS and email goes to the capped account. I use this at the office and it rocks.
Click to expand...

I also use a similar setup with great effect. I have a 20 Gig TI account for normal browsing etc and run a 1 Mbps Gamco Uncapped account for all the download stuff etc. The Gamco account runs at full speed. Routing is managed by a Mikrotik RB-2011LS :-)

Just love this red router from Mikrotik! Dialing the two PPPoE accounts on a single 4 Mbps line with some simple queues and 2 queue types to reserve bandwidth per account based on the Mikrotik pcg queue type.
 
Last edited:
I'll definitely have a look at the Microtik. Thx for the advice!
 
Mikrotik gurus, could you be specific please. I have a RB433AH with a pretty old version of ROS. I already route local an international to separate PPPoE connections to the same 20 Gig Telkom Internet account, but I want to get a 1Mbps uncapped account to use for downloads (50 gigs isn't enough). Problem is, it was a copy-pasta job, so I have no clue what I did or how I did it.

How exactly would I route all my downloads (which would be done by a dedicated MicroServer) to the uncapped connection? A one-to-one connection as it were - the Microserver would be the only machine using the uncapped account, and it would only use that account. Would that data still pass through the firewall on the Mikrotik?

On a related note, how do I access the drive on the Microserver? It's running Lubuntu, and (almost) everything else is running Windows.

Thanks.
 
Drunkard:
There are 2 ways that you can split the traffic:
A) Static routes, which would mean that you have like 600+ routes in your routing table
B) Route marking (mangle rules) by using an address list (which contains all the local routes)

Routing your HP Microserver's internet traffic via the uncapped account is very simple, and would require route marking - so you'll have to be careful if you used method B to split your local/international traffic!

Have a look at this tutorial: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Per-Traffic_Load_Balancing
 
Pada said:
Drunkard:
There are 2 ways that you can split the traffic:
A) Static routes, which would mean that you have like 600+ routes in your routing table
B) Route marking (mangle rules) by using an address list (which contains all the local routes)

Routing your HP MicroServer's internet traffic via the uncapped account is very simple, and would require route marking - so you'll have to be careful if you used method B to split your local/international traffic!

Have a look at this tutorial: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Per-Traffic_Load_Balancing
Click to expand...

I'm back at this point. Telkom doesn't have any 1Mbps uncapped accounts until 1 October, when they upgrade their 384 kbps lines to 1 Mbps <sarcasm> because no-one could possibly want a 1Mbps account unless they've got a 1Mbps line </sarcasm>.

Anywho, I've looked at my routing setup, and see that I've got option A set up. I don't see the need for this once I get my uncapped account, so I'll delete all that and just keep one route to the SAIX news server. The guide you pointed to is about per-traffic load balancing. All I want is a static link between my MicroServer (at 192.168.1.108) and the interface "pppoe-int5-UNCAPPED". How would I do that? I could get complicated and say that port 80 and 443 traffic to and from the MicroServer should go through the interface "pppoe-int1", but I don't think it's worth the effort. Just one static link should be fine. I appreciate your help.

Oh, and I've upgraded the MicroServer to Windows 8, so I don't need help fighting Lubuntu any more.
 
maxx69:
Do you have a paid rapidshare account, because rapidshare is limiting the free accounts to 30KB/s.

Drunkard #1:
Add the following kind of mangle firewall rules:
chain=prerouting src-address=192.168.1.108 connection-state=new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=uncapped-connection passthrough=yes
chain=prerouting connection-mark=uncapped-account action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=uncapped

Then under IP -> Routes, add the following rule:
dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=pppoe-int5-UNCAPPED routing-mark=uncapped

And then lastly, under IP -> Routes -> Rules, add:
dst-address=192.168.1.0/24 routing-mark=uncapped action=lookup table=main
 
Pada said:
maxx69:
Do you have a paid rapidshare account, because rapidshare is limiting the free accounts to 30KB/s.

Drunkard #1:
Add the following kind of mangle firewall rules:
chain=prerouting src-address=192.168.1.108 connection-state=new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=uncapped-connection passthrough=yes
chain=prerouting connection-mark=uncapped-account action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=uncapped

Then under IP -> Routes, add the following rule:
dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=pppoe-int5-UNCAPPED routing-mark=uncapped

And then lastly, under IP -> Routes -> Rules, add:
dst-address=192.168.1.0/24 routing-mark=uncapped action=lookup table=main
Click to expand...

I'm afraid it didn't work - news server stuff is still going through "pppoe-loc1".

Should the connection-mark in the two chains be the same?
 
I just use the following rules:

Maybe try the following:
Under Mangle rules
chain=prerouting src-address=192.168.1.108 action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=uncapped
passthrough=yes


Then under IP -> Routes, add the following
dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=pppoe-int5-UNCAPPED routing-mark=uncapped distance =1

HTH
grubs
 
Drunkard #1 said:
I'm afraid it didn't work - news server stuff is still going through "pppoe-loc1".

Should the connection-mark in the two chains be the same?
Click to expand...
Uhm no.

It is 1 chain: prerouting

Secondly, my rules first mark the new outgoing connections from that machine as 'uncapped-conn'.
The the second rule (which should have passthrough=no), will mark the routing as 'uncapped' only if the connection was marked as 'uncapped-conn'.

Now my rules won't work if the connection was already established. You need to disconnect and reconnect before the connection will be marked with my rules.

Alternatively, use grubsner's mangle rule (but change passthrough to no), which uses more resources, but it will route the existing connections over the uncapped account! So it will actually let the existing connections drop.
 
Pada said:
Alternatively, use grubsner's mangle rule (but change passthrough to no), which uses more resources, but it will route the existing connections over the uncapped account! So it will actually let the existing connections drop.
Click to expand...

Hey Pada,

I thought I understood mikrotik's implementation of passthrough :wtf:....what it does is stop the mangle rule processing once the particular rule has been satisfied right? Otherwise the router will continue to process the routing but this will only take up resources instead of meaningful route markings?

My rule will process ANY connection type? where if you mark the connection type as NEW it will only process new connections?

Grubs
 
Yes, you correctly understood the passthrough option.
You could leave that mangle rule of yours set to passthrough=yes, but then the mikrotik will process the rules next in the list, which may override your route marking and use up more resources & time.

If you're first marking the connection, then the packet (used for queues/shaping) and then the routing, then you have to set passthrough=yes on the connection & packet marking, otherwise the routing would never be marked.

And yes, your rule will process any connection type, including existing connections.
If you want to make use of the connection-state=new rule, you have to mark the connection.

If you don't have tonnes of connections passing through the router, then connection marking is perhaps not necessary, because it will only save a tiny amount of processing power.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
I'm back at this point. Telkom doesn't have any 1Mbps uncapped accounts until 1 October, when they upgrade their 384 kbps lines to 1 Mbps <sarcasm> because no-one could possibly want a 1Mbps account unless they've got a 1Mbps line </sarcasm>.
Click to expand...

That would be because 384 uncapped accounts are already capable of 1Mbps, in preparation for the upgrade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X