eetings and respect
Good time

I want to separate traffic sent and received traffic ?
How do we separate traffic sent and received traffic ?

That is, a send traffic from ether1 and Traffic received from the ether2 !
1. What is your solution for this scenario ?
2. In general, how many solutions are available for this scenario 


Kind Regards
Good luck to you

You would need to use a dynamic routing protocol like BGP and own your own IP space that you can advertise to two different providers. You can then use filters to advertise your available IP space differently and try and control how things are routed to you. Otherwise you cannot separate the upload and download parts of a given connection to two different internet providers. That is because of NAT, and trying to do so would create invalid connections.

It's not about multiple providers, it's just about dual simplex ethernets. Anyway it is useless not providing any advantage as ethernet is duplex already. You will just make delays by packet processing to decide where to send it.

Many thanks for your quick response

BGP can not do without ?
I do not intend to use the BGP ! 

You have another idea?  ( without BGP )

without knowing more about your scenario its hard to know what option will be the best

maybe using asymmetric routing, with static routing this can be easily acomplished

without knowing more about your scenario its hard to know what option will be the best

There are no particular scenario. In the laboratory for testing and learning experience

maybe using asymmetric routing, with static routing this can be easily acomplished

What is asymmetric routing ? Can you More Explain ?
king regards

It's not about multiple providers, it's just about dual simplex ethernets. Anyway it is useless not providing any advantage as ethernet is duplex already. You will just make delays by packet processing to decide where to send it.

Ethernet is full duplex, but 802.11 isn't. Now, we could question the benefits of using two wireless links this way - to make a full duplex one. Wouldn't be better just double the channel width, instead of using two separate channels?
Never did it. Never even tried to. But I think this is where he is headed...

Why do you believe that this topic is about wireless?
There is already nstreme dual for wireless if you need. But this is about ethernet...

without knowing more about your scenario its hard to know what option will be the best

There are no particular scenario. In the laboratory for testing and learning experience

maybe using asymmetric routing, with static routing this can be easily acomplished

What is asymmetric routing ? Can you More Explain ?
king regards

Do you really think "learning" is "ask others details on how to do it"?
Or "ask questions on a forum that Google can answer for you"?
I don't think that is learning...
Please go out and gather the information by yourself!  Then you will learn something.

Why do you believe that this topic is about wireless?
There is already nstreme dual for wireless if you need. But this is about ethernet...

Well, because I though he wanted to do the separation at Ethernet level - before it went into the AP.

Do you really think "learning" is "ask others details on how to do it"?
Or "ask questions on a forum that Google can answer for you"?

Yes !

I think , learning is :

1. Study
2. Ask a Question
3. Laboratory
4. trial and error
5. Practice, practice, practice

I don't think that is learning...

Your opinion is respected !
Thanks

Why do you believe that this topic is about wireless?
There is already nstreme dual for wireless if you need. But this is about ethernet...

Thankful
Yes, I'm going to isolate (Separation)  traffic on the Ethernet Port ( not wireless ! )

What is the purpose of this? Ethernet already is full duplex communication.
If it is just a learning task, please, share your results with us.

What is the purpose of this? Ethernet already is full duplex communication.

Yes. You are right
But I said, the goal of learning
In my lab, 3 vDSL modem available

two patton : ( With the passage of 50 Mbps traffic , each ) ( total 100Mbps )
one patton : ( With the passage of 15 Mbps traffic )

Patton 1 ( 50 Mbps ) = ether 1 ( only Recieve )
Patton 2 ( 50 Mbps ) = ether 2 ( only Recieve )
Patton 3 ( 15 Mbps ) = ether 3 ( only Send )

That's why I want to separate traffic
It does this by BGP easy to implement, but I am looking for other solution

If it is just a learning task, please, share your results with us.

Yes, Sure

I would do pcc load balancing in this case.
To split directions you would need some device on other side to join it together before leaving it go to Internet.

I would do pcc load balancing in this case.

I do not know .
Testing should be done.
But I know it's unlikely to be done by PCC

To split directions you would need some device on other side to join it together before leaving it go to Internet.

Yes.

This Devices is available on each side

topology

config

ping

winbox with the traffic of ping from 192.168.1.20 to 192.168.0.20 and ping from 192.168.0.20 to 192.168.1.20

here we can see one way traffic going in one interface and another way traffic going for another, including winbox management traffic

I would do pcc load balancing in this case.

I do not know .
Testing should be done.
But I know it's unlikely to be done by PCC

To split directions you would need some device on other side to join it together before leaving it go to Internet.

Yes.

This Devices is available on each side

That was not known before. If you have directly connected modems on both sides and routers behind them, use static routing as chechito wrote.

chechito thanks a lot
Really grateful
You graciously
Now I understand what you mean by Route asymmetric