Yup. Make sense. But you are only thinking from 2-WAN environment in a failover topology with the primary WAN physically disconnected. I am coming from a multi-WAN angle factoring in the 3 different WAN statuses – health check passed, health check failed and physically disconnected.
My idea of keeping health check on the last WAN comes from more of a reporting angle. Health check will not disable the last WAN in any case. But I bet some user might still want to know the status of their last WAN as reported by health check on the web admin page. Say if the last WAN dies also, user can login to the Peplink and see that it fails health check (instead of health check disabled which doesn’t comfort the user very much I imagine) and there will be a message or something that says Peplink still passes traffic to this last despite of the health check status as a very last resort WAN so if Internet doesn’t work that means the last WAN is gone also.
This is what I was thinking - When a user is down to on his last WAN. Peplink will still do health check and report its status as it always does on the web admin page. But Peplink will not in any case disable it even if health check comes back negative.
Taking this one step further - Imagine a 5 WAN environment. 1 WAN reported physically disconnect. 3 WAN reported health check failure. We are down to the 1 last WAN. Now the modem of this last WAN dies making this WAN physically disconnected. What I was thinking is to still route traffic to all health-check-failed links and report on the web admin dashboard that all links appear to be down, but say Peplink is still forwarding traffic to WAN 2, 3 and 4 that are reported health check failed as a very last resort.
I hope it is clearer this way. Any thought on this?