I use this very same feature of openwrt to load balance between my two ISPs. Here in argentina neither of the two ISP are reliable, but cheap enought if you really use then and you need reliability.
I recommend multiwan3 as the op suggest, other pkgs didnt work for me.
Some modern routers have two radios for 2.5 and 5ghz, but even with one radio openwrt allows you to set it up as client and ap.
I find other features of openwrt quite amazing like dnsmasq. It is a really powerful firmware.
I find openWRT is a really useful firmware project and I use it in any situation where it is feasible. Bandwidth Throttling / QOS is often in demand. Wireless Bridging works well. A nice side effect of using openWRT is that you sidestep many of the "backdoors" that sometimes appear (intentionally or otherwise) in stock firmware.
I also helped create a page that can help find the current most powerful routers that support WRT:
http://rooftopbazaar.com/routerfirmware/
Xfinity says your wireline speed will not be impeded by others who are using WiFi via the xfinitywifi shared service. Since DOCSIS 3.0 has no limit on the maximum number of channels (source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Bandwidth_tables ), I believe in order to make that claim, they have to allocate additional channels to the xfinitywifi traffic.
BUT OP will only double his bandwidth if he is purchasing a rate less than or equal to the actual realized throughput of his WiFi connection, somewhere from 50-90Mbps.
Additionally, all Cable modems have some kind of throttling because the speeds offered by ISPs (30x5, 100x8, etc.) are not evenly divisible by the per-channel rate of DOCSIS 2.0/3.0 (38Mbps Down, 27Mbps up).
Every modem has a finite number of channels it can bond. Up and down are different. Also the CMTS (the device the cable modem connects to) limits the number of bonds per source modem.
A piece of coax has a finite amount of bandwidth it can carry. As modulation schemes get better (QAM256) you can do more with less.
To say DOCCIS 3 is limitless is not taking into consideration the hardware and frequency constraints. The more frequency you allocate to Internet the less is available for other programming (TV).
>Xfinity says your wireline speed will not be impeded by others who are using WiFi
From my experience with low throughput 2-4mbps lines I'm deeply sceptical about claims like that. Throughput will generally be OK...but if you want stable latency...good luck. The second someone else is on the same line goes flakely unless its a high powered line (fibre etc)
I also have XfinityWifi. The box that provides it is extremely buggy. I recommend setting it to "Bridge mode" (which turns it into a dumb modem) and then using OpenWRT in a normal, router configuration. You get a really good speed boost, especially over wifi, just by taking Xfinity's routing out of the equation.
Another way for "bonding" would be to use mptcp ( http://multipath-tcp.org ). You might need to patch and build openwrt yourself for it... The key difference is with mptcp each individual tcp connection uses both connections at the same time, rather than picking a lottery.
Do xfinitywifi hotspots permanently authenticate clients based only on their MAC addresses? A malicious client could easily find the MAC address of any device connected to a xfinitywifi hotspot (by using e.g. airodump-ng [0]) and then spoof that device's MAC address on their own computer to access the internet via the hotspot without any authentication.
Yes! I discovered (completely by accident) that 00:11:22:33:44:55 is authenticated to someone's account, so I just set my mac to that when I need to use their shit
That's basically the only way to do it.
If it were really clever, it could ignore packets based on vendor extensions and device characteristics. They are not that easy to spoof (you would have to modify the driver, as opposed to just changing the MAC).
I actually use this method to use school WiFi anonymously (or rather, as someone else).
I don't think it's permanent, but once you authenticate, any other device that can spoof the MAC address can connect. It might expire a month or so after the last connection.
I'm sorry but I can't take the author's advice on speed seriously when he's using Comcast's charge-you-every-month modem which is known to get terrible speeds to begin with. Let alone someone who is running wifi between their router and their modem.
If you want the fastest speeds on Comcast, pick up a DOCSIS 3 Motorola Surfboard modem. I'm paying for 100/20. This is what I get with my surfboard http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4251868226
Doesn't the xfinitiwifi inject ads MITM-style? I recall seeing some weird html overlays with xfinity ads on random web pages last time I browsed over one of these SSIDs.
I don't know if they inject ads, but they have the capability to do it. When I connect to an "xfinitywifi" SSID, the first HTTP page load I do will have a little "You're using XFINITY Wi-Fi. Isn't it totally awesomesauce?!"-style pop-up appear for a few seconds in the lower right corner of the browser window.
There are ISPs that don't throttle your access to the neighborhood pipe? It doesn't have to be artificial, either. Just using better tech for the pipe that has to carry multiple users.
> The only way it would increase bandwidth is if it evades artificial throttles.
Well obviously. They give you a specific bandwidth for your house, you can buy more or less bandwidth if you want.
> Having two connections to the same (neighborhood) pipe seems useless.
The neighborhood pipe can probably do 100 to 1000 times the bandwidth to each individual house. So how is that useless?
Plus with xfinitywifi they allocate double bandwidth to the house, so the wifi bandwidth doesn't slow down the purchased bandwidth. (The cable modem can easily handle 10 times the bandwidth typically allocated to it.)
UPC has a similar system, where the guest network has extra bandwidth, on top of your own subscription. Even if Comcast doesn't do this, he is leeching off his neighbour's connection and not his own.
Neighborhood network is usually multimode fiber on the headend providing many times the per modem bandwidth, especially if they're expecting competition any time soon.
In my area, there are wireless access points mounted on some telephone poles which provide WiFi hotspots for anyone with credentials from a major local ISP.
Apart from that, my understanding is that Comcast routers broadcast your network and also broadcast this comcast hotspot network, and they are metered (and presumably capped) independently. So with this hack you would use only your equipment, you're just taking advantage of both networks that are being broadcast by your router.
It may be that connections though xfinitywifi don't count against the neighbors allocated bandwidth and won't degrade their service since their router and connection support more than their allocated bandwidth. Can anyone confirm if this is the case?
It works because he has access to two separate networks and can load balance between the two. His neighbors could be using any ISP. So long as his router can also connect to their network, he can load balance between their wireless network and his wired network. If his router had three radios, he could load balance between to upstream wireless networks and his own downstream network.
I believe this only increases apparent bandwidth for applications which may open multiple connections at the same time, like web browsing and BitTorrent.
I just had comcast to my home last week. I pay for 120 mbps but when connected via cat 5 it only reached 90 max mbps which would fine considering when using a wifi router it only reaches around 30 mbps. I have moved around the wifi router but it doesn't make much of a difference. The technician told me the 120 mbps that I am being charged for is for for direct access and wifi won't reach 120mbps. I complained to customer care saying if I go to the grocery store and pay for 120 items, I expect to get 120 items, not 30 items. I told them they should tell people upfront that 120 mbps is when you are plugged in directly since most people use a wifi router but this still doesn't make sense to me since they can easily downgrade you to, say, 6 mbps without a problem.
Does anyone know if this OpenWRT works? I would love to push my speed to its limits. Comcast pretty much has a monopoly in my city and they are not very helpful.
I don't see the problem. If you paid for 120 items and you can't carry them in your car, it's not the grocery store's fault, even if "most people" used small cars.
If you want to get a better Wifi connection, get a good router and plug it in to the one installed by Comcast.
It's extremely rare for OpenWRT to magically make your wifi connection's raw speed faster. It's good for many things, but not that.
Wifi is extremely finicky, due to interference and the FCC's limits on legal transmit power levels. But you should be able to get same-room speeds of at least 180 megabits if you have a decent router and a client that supports it. The key things are you need to use a 5 GHz radio and (for distance) channel numbers >100. Many ISPs still give out 2.4 GHz-only radios, so performance will suck.
It sounds like you just may have a few things to learn about how networking works. Comcast is selling you a coax line into your house and, if you rent their modem, giving you an ethernet interface to it. It isn't making any claims about what happens after that. They can't have control over all your networking hardware and how you configure it.
Cat5 has a max throughput of 100mbps. 802.11g wifi (probably what you're using) has a max throughput of 54mbps.
Either buy a Cat5e/Cat6 cable or change your wifi access point to use 802.11n. I am connected to my 2007 Airport Extreme at 300mbps right now using 802.11n.
Now that the op has published this workaround, I have the feeling that Comcast will take steps to stop this from happening. Comcast's version of "customer service."
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this in the thread but you can actually opt out of the xfinitiwifi thing. The deal is that you can use any of the hotspots if you have a comcast account and also share your router. If you opt out, you can no longer use the xfinitiwifi hotspots but nobody can use yours either.
Have you tried opting out? When my dad did, he ran into a mess of broken links and incorrect support pages. Eventually he got someone to opt him out over the phone... only to have the "xfinitywifi" network pop back up the next day. It took a few more tries to have it actually disabled once and for all.
I imagine the less technically-inclined would have given up a lot earlier in the process.
I've successfully disabled xfinity wifi on my router. You have to do it through your comcast.com account instead of through the router admin. After updating your account, Comcast will remote disable the xfinity wifi on the router.
Not sure that this is the case. I guess it depends on what opting out is. I never called anyone to opt out, though I did turn it off in the modem itself. Then a few months later I bought a new modem entirely and returned the Comcast one. At no point then or now did I lose the ability to connect to other xfinitywifi's.
If this is the case, then would it be more efficient to connect to your own router with the second connection and just allocate the extra channels to yourself?
Could something like this (two ISP connections) be combined to use the speed of both links at once (i.e. speed up a single connection). Perhaps with the aide of a remote VPS?
Very cool. In practice, unless you live next to a coffee shop, there'd almost never be anyone connected to your xfinity wifi network, so you'd get the full bandwidth anyhow. Although, if your neighbor has xfinity wifi, it'd be a smart way to leach off your neighbor's bandwidth.
Also, because your router is a routed client of the xfinity wifi network, I'd imagine there'd be a big increase in latency. It'd be interesting to see the before/after speed test results.
It sounds like a creative way to get around bandwidth allocations.
My service is 3Mbps. My modem & my hardline are both capable of much more, but I only pay for 3Mbps so I only get 3Mbps. I think this trick is basically allowing the author to tap into the unallocated extra modem & line capacity that is currently used to feed xfinitywifi.
I think you can connect to your neighbors xfinity hotspot without using up any of their private bandwidth allocation. The hotspot connection gets its own.
What the author doesn't realize is he's doubled nothing. DOCCIS networks are shared mediums. That means you have to double bandwidth by increasing the number of channels you have. Newer DOCCIS modema are already bonding channels today. Most commonly 4 channel bond on the downstream and 2 on the up. By connecting to the cable modem twice, via two different routes, does nothing to change the available bandwidth available to the users behind the CPE (cable modem). As some have stated you could do this against your neighbors modem to share more channels on the cable media, however your neighbor is on the same HFC node and sharing the same available bandwidth to how many other users are connected to that node. You may get a few extra megabit but its the latency that will make that portion of the link "slower" so you really won't improve things much, if at all.
The best way to improve consumer Internet connection is to get a fast router that can route fast in hardware. I'm always amazed people think a SOHO device doing WiFi, NAT, DHCP, DNS, etc. on gimped hardware is "fast". The majority of time it's not and real improvements can be realized with dedicates hardware. Meaning that until you split service off from routing using cheap, consumer SOHO gear, will most always be the bottleneck.
Is the router really a likely bottleneck? From everything I've read, it's rare for even a $40 router not to achieve 70mbps, which is more than the average connection offers.
I just bought a TP-Link TL-WR841N and it has no problem maxing out my 30mbps connection, even with some extra LAN traffic.
>I'm always amazed people think a SOHO device doing WiFi, NAT, DHCP, DNS, etc. on gimped hardware is "fast".
I'm a big fan of my TP-Link WDR4300. I can easily max out my 250/60Mbps uplink while it's also doing NAT and some light firewalling, in software. It also runs all of my IPAM (DHCP/DNS). Additionally, it also runs OpenVPN (and can do ~20Mbps of encrypted bandwidth) and a BGP session (using Quagga) over that VPN to my local hackerspace. All in a single OpenWRT device that's sub $70.
Is it equivalent in performance to a hardware router? Of course not. But these start at a few thousand dollars (even Cisco ASA and Juniper SRX class hardware does its routing in software...).
This is all well and good until you start doing anything with address sensitive replies. For example a VoIP call would need some way of anchoring the packets to a specific connection for the duration of the call (some kind of session pinning would be ideal).
I like the idea but I wonder how it performs on many use cases (like Skype or online gaming).
routing should be 'sticky' to an ip address; connections to any given ip address should use the same outbound route for the duration of that connection.
Linux outgoing network traffic load-balancing is performed on a per-IP connection basis – it is not channel-bonding, where a single connection (e.g. a single download) will use multiple WAN connections simultaneously
I think it's noteworthy only because of how wide spread Comcast's newer router's are becoming, specifically in dense areas in the United States. It's a technique that obviously isn't ground breaking or that technical, but it's actually viable because of these new routers Comcast is renting out as their standard router now.
I live in a typical neighborhood in Chicago; houses are spaced apart enough to where you don't get a ton of wifi overlap, but enough to see a handful of your neighbors networks. I noticed the first "XfinityWifi" network about mid/late last year and now will see between 2 - 3 from my house. I found this post interesting because of how he is leveraging these, relatively, open connections.
xfinitywifi is provided by Comcast, you need a valid comcast login to connect. He is a Comcast subscriber himself, and thus he has a valid Comcast login.
jfroma|11 years ago
proctor|11 years ago
listic|11 years ago
CodeWriter23|11 years ago
BUT OP will only double his bandwidth if he is purchasing a rate less than or equal to the actual realized throughput of his WiFi connection, somewhere from 50-90Mbps.
Additionally, all Cable modems have some kind of throttling because the speeds offered by ISPs (30x5, 100x8, etc.) are not evenly divisible by the per-channel rate of DOCSIS 2.0/3.0 (38Mbps Down, 27Mbps up).
And then there's this: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r29743167-Signals-Report-16-...
windexh8er|11 years ago
A piece of coax has a finite amount of bandwidth it can carry. As modulation schemes get better (QAM256) you can do more with less.
To say DOCCIS 3 is limitless is not taking into consideration the hardware and frequency constraints. The more frequency you allocate to Internet the less is available for other programming (TV).
Havoc|11 years ago
From my experience with low throughput 2-4mbps lines I'm deeply sceptical about claims like that. Throughput will generally be OK...but if you want stable latency...good luck. The second someone else is on the same line goes flakely unless its a high powered line (fibre etc)
TD-Linux|11 years ago
sajal83|11 years ago
I blogged about my setup at http://www.sajalkayan.com/post/fun-with-mptcp.html
pyvpx|11 years ago
m0skit0|11 years ago
http://s2.postimg.org/vpba0a1wp/image.png
theandrewbailey|11 years ago
http://postimg.org/image/7zcz4oh25/
MrRadar|11 years ago
tedunangst|11 years ago
ipsin|11 years ago
michaelmcmillan|11 years ago
http://motherfuckingwebsite.com
itsjareds|11 years ago
unknown|11 years ago
[deleted]
prawn|11 years ago
hlegius|11 years ago
tkmcc|11 years ago
[0] http://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=airodump-ng
finnn|11 years ago
aselzer|11 years ago
I actually use this method to use school WiFi anonymously (or rather, as someone else).
wampus|11 years ago
gtwy|11 years ago
If you want the fastest speeds on Comcast, pick up a DOCSIS 3 Motorola Surfboard modem. I'm paying for 100/20. This is what I get with my surfboard http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4251868226
narrowrail|11 years ago
0x0|11 years ago
rwg|11 years ago
malchow|11 years ago
ars|11 years ago
No.
I feel like this post should be longer, but I can't think else to say. The answer to your question is: No.
mwsherman|11 years ago
The only way it would increase bandwidth is if it evades artificial throttles. Having two connections to the same (neighborhood) pipe seems useless.
Dylan16807|11 years ago
ars|11 years ago
Well obviously. They give you a specific bandwidth for your house, you can buy more or less bandwidth if you want.
> Having two connections to the same (neighborhood) pipe seems useless.
The neighborhood pipe can probably do 100 to 1000 times the bandwidth to each individual house. So how is that useless?
Plus with xfinitywifi they allocate double bandwidth to the house, so the wifi bandwidth doesn't slow down the purchased bandwidth. (The cable modem can easily handle 10 times the bandwidth typically allocated to it.)
ricardobeat|11 years ago
mst|11 years ago
Possibility two: placebo effect.
mentat|11 years ago
moron4hire|11 years ago
grok2|11 years ago
antsar|11 years ago
Apart from that, my understanding is that Comcast routers broadcast your network and also broadcast this comcast hotspot network, and they are metered (and presumably capped) independently. So with this hack you would use only your equipment, you're just taking advantage of both networks that are being broadcast by your router.
chwahoo|11 years ago
ghouse|11 years ago
bithive123|11 years ago
andrewhillman|11 years ago
Does anyone know if this OpenWRT works? I would love to push my speed to its limits. Comcast pretty much has a monopoly in my city and they are not very helpful.
icebraining|11 years ago
If you want to get a better Wifi connection, get a good router and plug it in to the one installed by Comcast.
apenwarr|11 years ago
Wifi is extremely finicky, due to interference and the FCC's limits on legal transmit power levels. But you should be able to get same-room speeds of at least 180 megabits if you have a decent router and a client that supports it. The key things are you need to use a 5 GHz radio and (for distance) channel numbers >100. Many ISPs still give out 2.4 GHz-only radios, so performance will suck.
lvs|11 years ago
getsat|11 years ago
Either buy a Cat5e/Cat6 cable or change your wifi access point to use 802.11n. I am connected to my 2007 Airport Extreme at 300mbps right now using 802.11n.
aceperry|11 years ago
chatmasta|11 years ago
mintplant|11 years ago
I imagine the less technically-inclined would have given up a lot earlier in the process.
joezydeco|11 years ago
simple10|11 years ago
http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-support/internet/disabl...
toxican|11 years ago
grandalf|11 years ago
blfr|11 years ago
logone|11 years ago
nrahnemoon1|11 years ago
Also, because your router is a routed client of the xfinity wifi network, I'd imagine there'd be a big increase in latency. It'd be interesting to see the before/after speed test results.
sliverstorm|11 years ago
My service is 3Mbps. My modem & my hardline are both capable of much more, but I only pay for 3Mbps so I only get 3Mbps. I think this trick is basically allowing the author to tap into the unallocated extra modem & line capacity that is currently used to feed xfinitywifi.
cbabraham|11 years ago
windexh8er|11 years ago
The best way to improve consumer Internet connection is to get a fast router that can route fast in hardware. I'm always amazed people think a SOHO device doing WiFi, NAT, DHCP, DNS, etc. on gimped hardware is "fast". The majority of time it's not and real improvements can be realized with dedicates hardware. Meaning that until you split service off from routing using cheap, consumer SOHO gear, will most always be the bottleneck.
pat2man|11 years ago
mst|11 years ago
He isn't connecting to the same modem twice.
You seem to be dripping misplaced condescension all over the floor - would you like me to fetch a mop?
icebraining|11 years ago
I just bought a TP-Link TL-WR841N and it has no problem maxing out my 30mbps connection, even with some extra LAN traffic.
q3k|11 years ago
I'm a big fan of my TP-Link WDR4300. I can easily max out my 250/60Mbps uplink while it's also doing NAT and some light firewalling, in software. It also runs all of my IPAM (DHCP/DNS). Additionally, it also runs OpenVPN (and can do ~20Mbps of encrypted bandwidth) and a BGP session (using Quagga) over that VPN to my local hackerspace. All in a single OpenWRT device that's sub $70.
Is it equivalent in performance to a hardware router? Of course not. But these start at a few thousand dollars (even Cisco ASA and Juniper SRX class hardware does its routing in software...).
jlmendezbonini|11 years ago
josh2600|11 years ago
I like the idea but I wonder how it performs on many use cases (like Skype or online gaming).
tres|11 years ago
from http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/howto/mwan3
Linux outgoing network traffic load-balancing is performed on a per-IP connection basis – it is not channel-bonding, where a single connection (e.g. a single download) will use multiple WAN connections simultaneously
ausjke|11 years ago
late2part|11 years ago
unknown|11 years ago
[deleted]
enraged_camel|11 years ago
I don't see anything particularly noteworthy here. He just happens to have a very specific setup and is leveraging it.
ssully|11 years ago
I live in a typical neighborhood in Chicago; houses are spaced apart enough to where you don't get a ton of wifi overlap, but enough to see a handful of your neighbors networks. I noticed the first "XfinityWifi" network about mid/late last year and now will see between 2 - 3 from my house. I found this post interesting because of how he is leveraging these, relatively, open connections.
icebraining|11 years ago
jebblue|11 years ago
"When you rent a cable modem/router combo from Comcast (as one of my nearby neighbors apparently does)"
It may be illegal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_piggybacking
Comcast is not on the EFF's list of Wireless Friendly ISP's (referenced in the Wiki article):
https://www.eff.org/pages/wireless-friendly-isps
Even if it were: http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessfaqs/f/legal_free...
"Using a neighbor's wireless access point may not be legal even with their permission. "
icehawk|11 years ago