<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: USG-100 dual wan problem&#x27; in forum &#x27;ZyXEL&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27871675</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 12:59:27 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 12:59:27 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887897</link>
<description><![CDATA[Kirby Smith posted : These 10.X.X.X addresses show up as gateway values in the PPPoE settings menu.  They appear to be user set (black) rather than ISP resolved (blue), although I certainly didn't set them.  On my USG50, both are the same IP address.  I have always thought of them as ZyXEL generated, but now I feel a need to look into this further.  <br><br>kirby]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887897</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 10:34:34 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887814</link>
<description><![CDATA[Kirby Smith posted : This is interesting, not because I have to deal with VPNs, but because I use PPPoE, and my WAN_ppp connections get 77.X.X.X block IP addresses from FairPoint, but internally, I have seen the USG establish 10.X.X.X addresses for the WAN connections that the PPP connections are linked to.  I can't find the address values right now, but I wonder if they are usually set to be on the same subnet.<br><br>kirby]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887814</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 10:17:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887394</link>
<description><![CDATA[repe23 posted : Thank you (both) for your answers.<br><br>I still can't test the firmware you sent me, I hope to test it during this week.<br><br>Anyway, I made some other test : I changed the dlink unit for another USG-100 with also 2 wans, so this time I created the VPN between 2 USG-100 both with wan HA. Wan1 form USG unit 1 is directly connected to wan1 of USG unit 2, and the same for wan2.<br><br>If I use the same subnet for all wan interfaces in both USG, for example 10.0.0.0/24, I have the same problem I had with Dlink unit. When I disconnect wan1 on one of USG unit, the vpn is not changed to WAN2.<br>But if I use 1 subnet (10.0.10.0/24) for wan1 on both usg , and 1 subnet (10.0.20.0/24) for wan2 on both usg, the VPN and WAN HA works ok !<br><br>So it seems that the problem is when I use the same subnet for both wans. Did you hear this issue before ?<br><br>Thanks again for your help<br>Regards]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27887394</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 06:54:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27883060</link>
<description><![CDATA[Brano posted : Did you try the date firmware I've sent you?<br>There is DPD (dead peer detection) bug in IPSec in the current release. The date FW is fixing that. ... this may be whole or part of the issue you're experiencing.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27883060</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:59:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27882960</link>
<description><![CDATA[Kirby Smith posted : Probably a question to ask ZyXEL service reps.  At first I thought that your connectivity check was taking too long, but since you tested with it failed, I can't help but think that there is a software oversight.<br><br>(I don't have any VPNs to test this myself.)<br><br>kirby]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-USG100-dual-wan-problem-27882960</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>USG-100 dual wan problem</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/USG100-dual-wan-problem-27871675</link>
<description><![CDATA[repe23 posted : Hello all,<br><br>I want to implement a new USG-100 (firmware version 3.00(AQQ.2)) to work with 2 wan from different ISP. Before this implementation I created a test envirnoment to play with wan HA and VPN HA and confirm that all is working ok.<br><br>I created a ipsec VPN between USG-100 and a D-link DFL-200 router. D-link is configured with 2 remote gateways which belongs to USG-100.<br><br>USG-100 is using fixed ip address on both wan interfaces, both are using also connectivity check to know when the wan connectivity fails. Trunk interface is also configured with both wan interfaces. Wan1 is active and wan2 is passive using Round robin. Also a policy routing is configured to specify VPN ipsec traffic to use trunk intreface and then wan HA.<br><br>If i disable the wan interface from USG.100 web panel, the wan and VPN HA works ok, all traffic goes through wan2 after several seconds. The same if I disable wan2 -> all traffic goes to wan1 without problems.<br><br>My problem is when I manually disconnect the cable from wan1 port. Traffic is not changed to wan2, vpn is tring to create the ipsec tunnel from wan1 (and there is no cable on wan1 !).  The same problem if the connectivity check from wan interfaces fails, the traffic is not changed from wan1 to wan2....<br><br>then, It only works ok if I disconnect wans interfaces from web pannel ... Any Idea ?<br><br>Thanks in advance for your help<br>Regards<br>Pere]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/USG100-dual-wan-problem-27871675</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 16:44:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
