-----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of Paul Julian Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2016 2:07 PM To: 'MikroTik Australia Public List' <public@talk.mikrotik.com.au> Subject: Re: [MT-AU Public] Route marking
Thanks Mike, so I was doing it wrong then, most packet marking we do is for traffic prioritisation so interface is nearly always an integral part of
that makes sense as to why we were doing connection marking first, but in this case the problem we have is two ADSL connections from the same provider (us) and with the same gateway address, so to force SIP to use one connection only we want to do route marking and they send the SIP traffic out that connection, so at least you have helped confirm my thoughts :-)
Thanks Paul
-----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of Mike Everest Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2016 1:48 PM To: 'MikroTik Australia Public List' Subject: Re: [MT-AU Public] Route marking
Hi Paul,
You can do it that way, or mark explicitly on other parameters alone - for example, if you want to send traffic destined for a specific remote (e.g SIP server or something) then you may as well skip the connection marking step and just mark route based on destination IP.
The only time I use connection marking first is if I want to set a route mark depending on some other test, like for traffic entering some particular interface for replies to be routed back out the same interface.
There are probably other reasons to use connection marks, but I can't
With ADSL services (so long as you have a ppp address on them) you can use interface name instead of gateway to work around the same gateway address problem ;) But I suppose you knew it already! :-D Cheers! Mike. that and think of
any at the moment ;-)
Cheers!
Mike.
-----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of Paul Julian Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2016 1:37 PM To: public@talk.mikrotik.com.au Subject: [MT-AU Public] Route marking
Hi guys, just wanting to confirm something here due to some strange behaviour which might be admin induced J
When using mangle rules to put a routing mark onto packets, does one approach this the same as typical packet marking by marking the connection and then the packets based on the connection mark ? I setup a routing mark rule in this fashion but it did weird things, as soon as I just identified the packets directly based on a dest address instead of a connection rule first, and then set the route mark it worked fine.
Thanks Paul _______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com. au
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au