Windows 7 + NLB?

[zzz2496]

Wow, I didn't know Windows 7 can load balance traffic... But then again after a good reading, it looks like it doesn't do a "real" load balancing... For the OP, if you want to do load balancing, I suggest you use a separate router/computer to do the load balancing (Linux is preferable, Windows server 2008 is not so preferable, a real Cisco router is even more not preferable -but Ciscos will do the job WONDERFULLY-).

Kari, I've tried Netlimiter back in XP, it gave me more headache than simple bandwidth control. For some reason, my database server instance won't start no matter what I do if Netlimiter is installed...

zzz2496

 

[Kari]

Load balancing works well with two LAN NIC's or ywo WiFi NIC's. It's this ccombination of LAN and WiFi that's difficult; Windows by default prefer's LAN.

I've had no problems using NetLimiter. I really like it.

 

[severedsolo]

Martin, according to first post he's using LAN NIC and WiFi NIC, two NIC's.

So I see.... Sorry ignore that comment then, was posted at 2.30am

 

[l1nuxfre4k]

anybody got a solution or still thinking?

 

[Kari]

I think the key here is that Windows prefers LAN over WiFi. I do not know how to change it.

 

[l1nuxfre4k]

yea but still should be a way to make it balance it better and not just focus on one connection,
might be some setting in regedit that might help?
some program or something
what happens if i bridge the two connections?
starting a WM seems a little bit much

 

[zzz2496]

l1nuxfre4k, for a "true" solution - you should either use a VM or a real "hardware" router. Load balancing at host level is close to impossible (it's a client OS, not a server OS/router OS). You should load balance at the gateway (the router) since it's the one who's responsible for which traffic goes where (along with firewall).

zzz2496

 

[l1nuxfre4k]

True. But my router doesn't support 2incomeing internet connections and I have there for 2 routers now.
Any suggestions how to get around it?
Can't afford router that can take 2 wan connections so
I'm looking into Wm but would rather stay away from it since it takes so much of my pc

 

[Kari]

I might be wrong, but logically thinking you should get it working if you use two "equal" NIC's, I mean two * LAN or two * WiFi. Could you for instance find a second LAN adapter, put it in, disable WiFi and then try?

 

[l1nuxfre4k]

I would need to pull a cable throu the hole house to do that to far away and there for i need to use wifi :S

 

[severedsolo]

In that case, can't you get another Wifi Adapter and bridge the connections?

 

[zzz2496]

I might be wrong, but logically thinking you should get it working if you use two "equal" NIC's, I mean two * LAN or two * WiFi. Could you for instance find a second LAN adapter, put it in, disable WiFi and then try?

Kari,

The interface it self doesn't really matter. As long as the interfaces provide a Link, it is usable. You can load balance a serial connection (dial up), FC connection, Ethernet connection, and Wifi connection if need be, it's just interfaces.

The fundamental failure here is Windows 7, it's a client OS, it doesn't have the necessary components of the server edition network stack that brings the capability of load balancing.


l1nuxfre4k,

I suggest you start toying with PFsense, running PFsense in a VM is not that "heavy", PFsense is NOT Windows, it doesn't even have GUI (it does have a Web interface), you can assign 256MB memory to it (or 512MB) to sufficiently run. If you have the money, I suggest you go with Mikrotik RB450G router board, it has 5 individual interfaces, you can load balance up to 4 different internet connection sources (more if you use interface binding), it costs around $100. If that's too much, go with Mikrotik RB450, it costs around $70, or maybe RB750 for $40. All of it have same interface count, very capable hardware/software, super flexible.

Cheap way: PFsense in a VM.
Expensive way: a real router (I suggest Mikrotik, I use it personally and very pleased).

There's a saying: "No pain, no gain...".

zzz2496

 

[Kari]

I might be wrong, but logically thinking you should get it working if you use two "equal" NIC's, I mean two * LAN or two * WiFi. Could you for instance find a second LAN adapter, put it in, disable WiFi and then try?

Kari,

The interface it self doesn't really matter. As long as the interfaces provide a Link, it is usable. You can load balance a serial connection (dial up), FC connection, Ethernet connection, and Wifi connection if need be, it's just interfaces.

The fundamental failure here is Windows 7, it's a client OS, it doesn't have the necessary components of the server edition network stack that brings the capability of load balancing.

I was mostly thinking Windows' way to prioritize LAN over WiFi in a basic setup where both connections have own router.

 

[Kari]

I might be wrong, but logically thinking you should get it working if you use two "equal" NIC's, I mean two * LAN or two * WiFi. Could you for instance find a second LAN adapter, put it in, disable WiFi and then try?

Kari,

The interface it self doesn't really matter. As long as the interfaces provide a Link, it is usable. You can load balance a serial connection (dial up), FC connection, Ethernet connection, and Wifi connection if need be, it's just interfaces.

The fundamental failure here is Windows 7, it's a client OS, it doesn't have the necessary components of the server edition network stack that brings the capability of load balancing.

I was mostly thinking Windows' way to prioritize LAN over WiFi in a basic two line setup where both connections have own router.