Consumer-grade dual-homed connectivity options?

Ken Chase math at
Wed Dec 30 10:46:36 CST 2009

2x DSL not so backhoe-resistant.

I like mixing cable with dsl. Tasty disparate paths (modulo garden shears
applied to the single ingres point to your basement) if not technologies, orgs
and methodologies. Or radio + dsl, or pigeon + mule, take your pick.

Would be great if you could rate your connections somehow (ToS? packets under
1000 bytes?) and for those with high priority (voip, ssh < 10K/s != scp, etc)
spray redundant udp packets containing your data down all links, first packet to
the end point wins.  Higher speed stuff just gets RR'd for aggregate

Could even brute force your way through packetloss (ever try typing into an
ssh session with even 10% pl?) with redundant packets down the same links,
just use up 10K/s of bandwidth for 1K/s of desired throughput.

Nicer with the local cable co *IX'd a few ms away from the DSL endpoints. (I
suspect that higher latency differences would make this less viable). Course
there's still the issue of a single org at the endpoint - that's your SPOF,
but it's easily up more than my dsl at home here is. If it fails, use your
base connection to the other provider for internets (unfortunately your ips
for inbound connections wont be working during the outtage without more tricks
at the far end).

Does mulitlink specify any ability such as this, or is this a non existent protocol
as yet? Would anyone find it useful?


On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:12:59AM -0500, Tim Sanderson's said:
  >Do you control or have access to the provider side-the PPPoE server-and would both PPPoE connections hit the same PPPoE server at the provider? If so, I recommend setting up a PPP multilink with both DSL lines. The DSL provider would have to support that capability. I also recommend something like a Cisco 2691 router with two WIC-1ADSL cards. I have used this hardware for a 2xDSL multilink to my own home and it worked well.
  >-----Original Message-----
  >From: Paul Bennett [mailto:paul.w.bennett at]
  >Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 10:50 AM
  >To: nanog at
  >Subject: Consumer-grade dual-homed connectivity options?
  >Not sure whether this is an appropriate place to post this, but I thought
  >I'd give it a shot, since you're all knowledgeable folks with regard to
  >networking things...
  >At home, I currently run two DSL lines. Right now, we just have two
  >separate LANs, one connected to each line, with my wife's devices attached
  >to one, and my devices attached to the other. For a while now, I've been
  >thinking about setting up a load-balancing routing solution to give both
  >of us access to both lines.
  >I have the opportunity to acquire a refurbed Cisco Catalyst 2960 at a
  >ridiculously low price. I also have access to a (nominally) spare
  >quad-core 64-bit PC with 8GB of RAM. I say "nominally" because I'm
  >thinking about setting it up as a media center / gaming rig connected to
  >the TV in the den. That's largely beside the point, but it bears pointing
  >out that keeping the PC available for my other needs would be a good thing.
  >Is it going to be a more-effective solution to drop a few bucks on the
  >2960 and go through the hassle of learning how to set it up (and then
  >setting it up), or would I be better off putting a secured Linux distro
  >(e.g. gentoo-hardened, or something) on the semi-spare PC and running the
  >load-balancing via iproute2 and friends?
  >Either way, I'm looking at a learning curve, and a good amount of time
  >fannying around getting the damn thing working -- there's a good chance
  >I'd spend almost as much cash on the PC-based solution getting
  >good-quality network cards, and maybe fast HDD tech (though it seems like
  >RAM and cores would be more important than disk IO).
  >What are your opinions?
  >THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone, and delete the original message immediately. Thank you.

Ken Chase - ken at - +1 416 897 6284 - Toronto CANADA
Heavy Computing - Clued bandwidth, colocation and managed linux VPS @151 Front St. W.

More information about the NANOG mailing list