$25/month unlimited internet....interested?

[docj]

Originally Posted by tetranz

I don't think load balancing will help avoid buffering while streaming or report better speed on a speed test.

Load balancing is like having multiple pipes but you still only use one at a time. It mostly improves reliability rather than performance.

With all due respect, load balancing has enabled us to watch hundreds of hours of video using low-cost cellular connections that, by themselves would have been hard-pressed to do so without repeated rebuffering.

Load balancing is like having multiple pipes and the total volume of "stuff" carried by the pipes is more than any single pipe could carry on its own.

Your "one at a time" statement would be more accurate if a video stream consisted of a single data flow that had to go through one pipe or another. In reality a video stream consists of multiple overlapping calls for data each of which can go through any one of the pipes.

From my observations I have deduced that this "multi stream" effect is most pronounced with a high quality streaming service such as Netflix. It is appears to be slightly less effective on YouTube TV and even less so on Britbox.

Load balancing works best if all connections are roughly equivalent in speed. They don't have to be the exactly the same, but the presence of a particularly slow or erratic connection can mess things up.

To summarize, all I can say is that load balancing really works. My wife and I do like to watch video. I estimate our usage at >200GB/mo. When we use load balancing we rarely, if ever, experience rebuffering or even resolution reduction during an evening of watching.

With regard to your comment about speed tests, load balancing does NOT improve the reported speed because it doesn't change the flow through any single "pipe." In fact, some of the major speed test sites (Speedtest.net, in particular) will fail to report any speed at all when I'm using Load Balancing. I believe that's because the speed test consists of repeated data requests and each of those may go through a different pipe with a different IP address. This appears to drive the testing algorithm crazy!

Joel (AKA docj)

[tetranz]

Originally Posted by docj

Your "one at a time" statement would be more accurate if a video stream consisted of a single data flow that had to go through one pipe or another. In reality a video stream consists of multiple overlapping calls for data each of which can go through any one of the pipes.

Yes, I stand corrected on that. I didn't realize those services do multiple streams but it makes good sense how it grabs as much as possible ahead of what you're watching. Sounds good.

I don't know about Britbox but I guess one situation where it probably doesn't help much is live TV like you might get on YouTube TV or Sling. It probably depends on buffer size but you can't get far ahead before you run into the future.

[smiller]

It should be pointed out that if you have a good cellular connection then you shouldn't have any trouble steaming video (or at least I have never), and if you are load balancing multiple crappy connections it may not be much better (as noted above per-connection load balancing works best when all sources have adequate QoS.) I suppose you might see improvement in the case of multiple slow-but-reliable sources and you'd have to decide if this potential is worth the effort.

I guess if I had frequent problems streaming video then I'd consider implementing such solutions, but I travel a lot and frankly the issue just doesn't surface often enough to warrant the effort.

[docj]

Originally Posted by tetranz

I don't know about Britbox but I guess one situation where it probably doesn't help much is live TV like you might get on YouTube TV or Sling. It probably depends on buffer size but you can't get far ahead before you run into the future.

What I've noticed when we're watching YouTube TV is that one (or, at most, two) of my four connections appear to support the video stream, while the other two connections are available for other uses such as someone surfing the web with a laptop while the video is streaming.

I can only assume that this improves overall performance because, otherwise, the laptop's page loads would have to compete with the video stream for "room in the pipe." My WiFiRanger has a real-time graph of the last ~15 minutes of data usage and you can directly see data requests from the laptop taking a route different from the ongoing data stream.

Joel (AKA docj)

[docj]

Originally Posted by smiller

I suppose you might see improvement in the case of multiple slow-but-reliable sources and you'd have to decide if this potential is worth the effort.

Exactly! We live in a semi-rural area with slow and relatively unreliable connections on all three major cellular carriers. Even our post-paid phones don't get more than 10-15Mbps and they are limited to 15GB/mo each of hotspot data.

We're forced to rely on a combination of low-cost unlimited plans whose speed response varies from acceptable to awful with fairly frequent oscillations. The only way we could stream all our video without interruption is to do what we're doing. I know because I've been fooling with it since we cancelled DirecTV a year ago.

I don't think my situation is all that different than what many RVers encounter as they wander around the country. Sure, 15 miles away from me there's Verizon service that I've speed-tested at ~100Mbps. But it doesn't do me any good at my house!

You say that "you'd have to decide if this potential is worth the effort"; for us the choice is "TV or not TV"!

Joel (AKA docj)

[dkperez]

“It should be pointed out that if you have a good cellular connection then you shouldn't have any trouble steaming video” – and THERE’S the problem………. Yes, if we all had a “good cellular connection” I suspect the vast majority of this conversation wouldn’t even take place.


Unfortunately, unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, we have little control over the quality/speed of the cell connections. You may always have at least 30 Mbps at your house, but I sat here last night and WATCHED both cell phones drop from 20+ Mbps to less than 1 Mbps down (more than once the speed test was in the 300 Kbps DOWN) and less than 100 Kbps up. And sit there, largely worthless, off-and-on for much of the evening.


Visible is cost effective, and mostly, sort-of works, but even here at home, stationary, the speed fluctuates wildly. At 9:15 a.m. this morning, the ZTE Blade is getting 16 Mbps down and the Moto G7 is 23 Mbps down. By 7 pm it may be less than 10% of that.


I’m not sure load balancing will help when Visible or Verizon (whoever is turning the connection to garbage) throttles things to well UNDER 1Mbps, but I”ll probably give it a try. The holdup at this moment is the complexity of the instructions I’ve found and the risk that I’ll turn the AR750S into a brick.

[smiller]

Originally Posted by dkperez

The holdup at this moment is the complexity of the instructions I’ve found and the risk that I’ll turn the AR750S into a brick.

You won't turn the AR750S or anything running OpenWRT into a brick by messing with configuration since you can easily go back to your prior configuration if you mess things up.

Just select 'System -> Backup/Flash firmware' from the main menu and then select 'Backup'. This will save a backup of your current configuration to your PC. Then make whatever changes you want because if you mess up you can always simply restore the backup and you will be back in your original configuration.

[Pepperell]

Bought a new iPhone XS with 512 gig thru visible. Ported my fone number from my (Verizon) iPhone 6s. After a couple weeks of good service I ordered a visible sim with a new number for the 6s which now is hotspotted to the ROKU. I have a Surecall cell signal extender, and a Ubiquiti wifi extender and router.
Soon I’ll buy and port my wife’s Samsung S9 to a S10.

Issues:
1. Visible won’t work with S9, forcing the upgrade to S10.
2. Since we travel full time, visible won’t allow our South Dakota forwarding address to be used. Our solution for the new XS phone and 6S sim was to use our daughter’s address in New Hampshire. At some point you can change the billing address to your actual billing address. The new 6S phone number on that is a New Hampshire area code.

I’m satisfied with the service I’ve been receiving from visible for the month that I’ve had it.

[docj]

Originally Posted by Pepperell

S10.
2. Since we travel full time, visible won’t allow our South Dakota forwarding address to be used. Our solution for the new XS phone and 6S sim was to use our daughter’s address in New Hampshire. At some point you can change the billing address to your actual billing address. The new 6S phone number on that is a New Hampshire area code.

FWIW I'm using a commercial mail service address (PMB) for my Visible account and am not having any problems.

[dkperez]

Great, so I can't do anything stupid that can't be undone...


I asked over in the GL-INET forum and got two paragraphs touting the positives of load balancing... FOLLOWED by "I do not recommend this kind of load balancing for personal use"...


Still trying to find a straightforward, jargon-free set of instructions for exactly how...

[smiller]

It's not jargon, it's the instructions necessary to implement the feature (on a device where it is not formally offered.) Well OK, maybe it's both. But if you don't have the knowledge to understand them then it's certainly nothing to be ashamed of since most people don't, but in that case it may be best to seek out a product that formally offers load balancing and will provide end-user support. GLnet doesn't advertise the feature for their products so while the hardware may be capable, the Internet is going to be your only support on the software side.

The reason that load balancing is frequently not recommended for personal use has been stated already, but it does have the potential to provide improvement under certain circumstances. For most people a better solution than trying to fix the problem at the tail is instead fix the problem at the head, i.e. focus on getting as strong a signal as possible (including a good external antenna system if necessary), a high-line LTE modem, etc. If this is not successful (it will be in the majority of cases) then you can resort to advanced techniques such as load sharing among multiple service providers.

All of these solutions will cost money (either one-time equipment costs, perhaps recurring costs for multiple service providers, etc. depending ion which way you go.) Only you can determine your needs, but if networking technology is Greek to you (and again, don't feel bad as you have plenty of company) and are determined to go the load sharing route then a plug-and-play solution from a vendor who formally supports it is probably your best bet. I'm sure there's someone on the forum who can point you in the right direction

[gsgriffin]

For those coming here for the first time and jumping to the end, you skipped a lot of stuff. Some good. Some bad. A lot could be a waste of time, but you are here because you are interested in a simple solution for UNLIMITED internet for $40. Since the thread was started, currently you can get your monthly expenses down $25 getting a Party Pay. You need to Google that outside of here and not ask someone on this site to join. That appears to be against the rules.

Here is a summary of the thread to hopefully help get what you need to know without having to read it all. If you have the strength and courage of William Wallace….read it all!

(Pages below are only if you are using the default settings for the number of posts per page)
First 5 pages are mostly people saying, "Yes, I want to see that option"
Pages 5-15 were discussion using Jetpack or Pepwave and using different phones (and people still interested) and porting problems (I still don't recommend that you port your number)
Pages 15-60 have discussion about other services, other set-ups, and a lot more complaining that it didn't work and a lot of happy people that is all worked easily following the POST #10. Some tangents and then getting really confusing as to who was talking about what.
Page 60-67 - Uuukkk. Just some banter about the thread getting too long and my desire to try to help those coming in later not be consumed by 1,000 different options and systems and configurations. If the option on POST #10 doesn't work for you, feel free to search the IRV2 site and find a thread that offers different setups and configurations. Many other discussions. Doesn't help this thread to start new topics on different equipment. Please feel free to start a new topic outside of this thread in the forum category.

1) The "solution" is on post #10. There is an attached Google Doc that is kept up to date and gives a very specific list of equipment to purchase and disclaimers about the service to help set your expectations. The setup will work off of 12v USB in your RV and will allow multiple devices to all be connected to a hotspot. We run this while driving and stream our music on Pandora or Spotity the whole time. Doesn't need 120v to run anything. Please understand that this configuration is suggesting you buy their cheapest phone (get a new phone number for it) and leave it running constantly as your internet service.

2) The service is called Visible (now there is Yahoo, also owned by Verizon and appears to be exactly the same service). It is owned by Verizon and using their towers. Though unlimited internet, the speed fluctuates depending on area or time of day. Some have been using it for a long time and have enough speed to stream TV almost all the time. Others have used it in different areas at different times and NOT had enough speed. If you are looking at this as a permanent solution for your home or stationary RV, there is no way to tell if it will be good in your exact position, but the cost to try is fairly low.

3) If this solution is not the best setup for you, feel free to search for other threads on IRV2 that discuss higher cost and different configuration options. Search for "load balancing" or "high availability" or "redundancy". Plenty of other options. You can still add Visible to those other options. This thread configuration is not about those variations. Many use this setup to stream Netflix or Hulu and can do so all month long without worrying about limits. PLEASE...read and understand the disclaimers on the post #10 doc before you move forward.

4) Many have had a good and bad experiences using it around the country:
Rough start, but now glad
Followed POST #10 and went well
Setup and running in 30 minutes

Porting problems
Not good service
Not great speeds
Great Speeds

5) Visible doesn't ship to PO Boxes

6) There was a 5Mb download limit, but that was removed. Some experience very high speeds at times. Others stay lower. Most (but not all) seem to be able to stream most of the time (which is the main purpose of unlimited internet for most). Some getting very high speeds. Page 15.

7) Some long ago had problems porting their phone number, but I haven't seen that post in a long time. I switched my neighbor over to Visible just to get a new phone, and it took PagePlus 10 days just to release her number so Visible could activate it. Could be a problem with your previous carrier as well as Visible.
Port Problem

8) Like any cellular service, some get bad support or service. Others had great support and service. Their tech support is only through a chat....no phone to call. Again, reduce your odds of needing to use their support by following the doc on post #10

9) At this time, you can only have one phone and service per account. Little pain in the butt. I opted to create 4 accounts for 4 phones using different emails and payment methods. Not ideal, but I created my own Party Pay. $25/line/month=$100/month for 4 phones each with unlimited data. Phone for me, my wife, full-time internet, and my daughter.

10) This is not a super high-speed service. Many have compared and contrasted the speed using a standard Verizon or AT&T network. This option will most often be slower. Sometimes much slower. If having the highest speed possible is your need, see the header at the top about searching for other threads to help you get what you need.

11) There are discussions about using the SIM chip in Jetpack or other mifi devices. Some worked. Some worked for a time. Seems like some have been using it for a long time. No clarity or certainty. You can try. Just first need to activate their SIM using their App on phones that work with their app. Not all phone are compatible...which is why the instructions on post #10 are suggesting you just get their cheapest phone and not worry about compatibility and avoid tech support.
Pepwave
Jetpack
Getting JetPack to work
Then more to get it to work
Some stopped working

12) Some discussion about the WeBoost signal amplifier to increase your cellular range around page 13-15 (BTW...don't purchase the WeBoost unless signal strength is a common problem for you…adds a lot more work and expense)

So, the skinny....service is great for some and working to their needs and downloading 150-280 GIGs!!!!! a month. Others tried for a short while and could never get acceptable speeds.

Following the instructions on post #10 , most everyone (if they purchased the recommended equipment and followed the instruction) found it easy enough that they didn't need outside help. Some (even myself at times) have had issues with their support chat. Some loved it. Some were ready to kill. I would continue to recommend doing post #10 exactly so you take the cleanest route and most likely won't need their support. Any variation could force you to use their support chat. Hit or miss. Often people try to save $6 and not get a new 12V USB power adapter and then waste a lot of time wondering why it doesn't all work….hint, the power supply you have is not giving you 2.4A output….REQUIRED for the setup.

Some have tried variations. If you live on the internet 24/7 and require high availability all the time, try looking up user "DocJ" and send him a private message. He has options for those that need load-balancing or redundancy. This option and thread is not that. This is a simple option for those that aren't bothered by slower speeds at times but really benefit from a lower monthly cost all the time and want the option of streaming as much as they like, and don't want to try to buy various pieces of random equipment to build a system they don't understand. post #10 is doing that for you and saving you the trouble.

I should mention lastly that if you only need to connect up a single device (only a TV or only a computer….not both at the same time), you could skip everything on post #10 and just buy a phone from Visible for cheap. All of their phones have the HOTSPOT available for at least single connection by default….which is nice since most other providers want more money just to turn that on.

In the end, please read slowly and carefully the attached doc on post #10. If it doesn't seem right for you, I will encourage you to continue the search on IRV2 for other options. This thread is already too long to start new ideas or configurations. If you have an experience to post or questions on the configuration of post #10 , please continue to use this thread as many are still following and glad to help you with the configuration on post #10.

[gsgriffin]

Originally Posted by smiller

The reason that load balancing is frequently not recommended for personal use has been stated already, but it does have the potential to provide improvement under certain circumstances. For most people a better solution than trying to fix the problem at the tail is instead fix the problem at the head, i.e. focus on getting as strong a signal as possible (including a good external antenna system if necessary), a high-line LTE modem, etc. If this is not successful (it will be in the majority of cases) then you can resort to advanced techniques such as load sharing among multiple service providers.

This is good advice and explanation of what I've also tried to state. Thanks for putting it that way.

In particular, if someone thinks that they will double their speed and that will suddenly give them better Netflix quality, I do not believe that is possible. Streaming services typically will connect and send to a single ISP connection. It would switch from one service to the other based on strength or connection quality, perhaps, but you won't suddenly be able to stream 4k.

What a load balancer can do is allow Netflix to stream on your tv and work from your computer to watch youtube using the same wifi connection. If working properly, the load balancer can help make sure that each stream goes out through a different connection, if the load is too great for the primary or you configure the device for streams or ports manually...but that is not guaranteed and could a config challenge.

You recommendation is sound.

I'm hoping and looking forward to StarLink hopefully soon. I live in northwest Montana and should be first in the regions of less supported areas and under their initial provision range. I've signed up with several different addresses and hopefully get an invite for at least one.

[docj]

Originally Posted by gsgriffin

What a load balancer can do is allow Netflix to stream on your tv and work from your computer to watch youtube using the same wifi connection. If working properly, the load balancer can help make sure that each stream goes out through a different connection, if the load is too great for the primary or you configure the device for streams or ports manually...but that is not guaranteed and could a config challenge.

Your explanation would be correct if Netflix (and other streaming services) provided a continuous "stream" of data, but they don't.

Rather than imagining a steady stream of data, it's better to think of it as a "bucket filling" activity where data is continuously being put into a bucket that has a hole at the bottom where data is draining away. As long as you can keep the water level higher than the drain the video stream remains stable.

If you think of it in this manner, it becomes clear that you can improve things by adding additional hoses to help fill the bucket. Each hose may have a limited capacity, but, together they provide more water than a single pipe would have.

This is exactly how a sophisticated streaming service like Netflix operates. It doesn't make just one request for data; it can use multiple TCP data streams to fill its "bucket" and that's where load balancing can help a lot. Each connection acts like an additional "pipe" to keep the bucket full.

If you'd like to read more about this topic, I suggest taking a look at a new blog I posted about it: https://wifiranger.com/how-load-bala...-chill-better/ If you want more info than is contained in my blog post, there are more detailed references provided.

Joel (AKA docj)