Use different connections (wifi + ethernet) to increase speed on lan
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I have a laptop with a 100mb/s ethernet and a 75mb/s wireless connection to my internet router. This is the maximum speed each network adapter can get in my laptop, but my external link is higher.
I'm thinking if it's possible to use both connections to my router as one, joining their capacity up to 175mb/s in theory. My router is a Linux box, like most of the wifi routers, and I have ssh access to it, thus allowing it possibilities for some setup there as also.
Here's a graph of the network setup:
+----------+ETH (100Mbs)<------>-----------+Fiber (300Mbs)<-------> External
| MY | | ROUTER |
| LAPTOP | | |
+----------+WIFI (75Mbs)<------>-----------+
I know that there are other ways like buying an external gigabit ethernet adapter. But this is not a huge problem. I was just wondering if this is possible so setup (with no additional cost), so I could have better use of what I have, and I found out it's an interesting question.
networking
add a comment |
I have a laptop with a 100mb/s ethernet and a 75mb/s wireless connection to my internet router. This is the maximum speed each network adapter can get in my laptop, but my external link is higher.
I'm thinking if it's possible to use both connections to my router as one, joining their capacity up to 175mb/s in theory. My router is a Linux box, like most of the wifi routers, and I have ssh access to it, thus allowing it possibilities for some setup there as also.
Here's a graph of the network setup:
+----------+ETH (100Mbs)<------>-----------+Fiber (300Mbs)<-------> External
| MY | | ROUTER |
| LAPTOP | | |
+----------+WIFI (75Mbs)<------>-----------+
I know that there are other ways like buying an external gigabit ethernet adapter. But this is not a huge problem. I was just wondering if this is possible so setup (with no additional cost), so I could have better use of what I have, and I found out it's an interesting question.
networking
add a comment |
I have a laptop with a 100mb/s ethernet and a 75mb/s wireless connection to my internet router. This is the maximum speed each network adapter can get in my laptop, but my external link is higher.
I'm thinking if it's possible to use both connections to my router as one, joining their capacity up to 175mb/s in theory. My router is a Linux box, like most of the wifi routers, and I have ssh access to it, thus allowing it possibilities for some setup there as also.
Here's a graph of the network setup:
+----------+ETH (100Mbs)<------>-----------+Fiber (300Mbs)<-------> External
| MY | | ROUTER |
| LAPTOP | | |
+----------+WIFI (75Mbs)<------>-----------+
I know that there are other ways like buying an external gigabit ethernet adapter. But this is not a huge problem. I was just wondering if this is possible so setup (with no additional cost), so I could have better use of what I have, and I found out it's an interesting question.
networking
I have a laptop with a 100mb/s ethernet and a 75mb/s wireless connection to my internet router. This is the maximum speed each network adapter can get in my laptop, but my external link is higher.
I'm thinking if it's possible to use both connections to my router as one, joining their capacity up to 175mb/s in theory. My router is a Linux box, like most of the wifi routers, and I have ssh access to it, thus allowing it possibilities for some setup there as also.
Here's a graph of the network setup:
+----------+ETH (100Mbs)<------>-----------+Fiber (300Mbs)<-------> External
| MY | | ROUTER |
| LAPTOP | | |
+----------+WIFI (75Mbs)<------>-----------+
I know that there are other ways like buying an external gigabit ethernet adapter. But this is not a huge problem. I was just wondering if this is possible so setup (with no additional cost), so I could have better use of what I have, and I found out it's an interesting question.
networking
networking
edited Mar 13 at 8:51
Rui F Ribeiro
42k1483142
42k1483142
asked Mar 13 at 5:50
Allan DeamonAllan Deamon
1283
1283
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Simply: No, you cannot achieve that.
You may consider a solution that is easier: you have 2 ethernet interfaces and want to use them both. In Linux, it is called "bond" which uses LACP for bonding interfaces into one logical. However this requires support on the side of the switch as well (it needs to be configured, not sure if home switches are capable of such a thing). Even then one single connection will not be able to pass through more than a single link capacity (it is based on hashes of some header fields - which in communication between 2 nodes and the same service will be the same).
Another problem is routing because you have two separate L3 ports, your routing computation needs to be deterministic - therefore you can choose only one interface at a time for your usage.
What you could achieve is: consider you are running a few virtual machines, you will grant them access to ethernet (bridge the interface) and you will continue to use the wifi only. This way your throughput could rise over the limit of ethernet, but is a very specific scenario.
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f506016%2fuse-different-connections-wifi-ethernet-to-increase-speed-on-lan%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Simply: No, you cannot achieve that.
You may consider a solution that is easier: you have 2 ethernet interfaces and want to use them both. In Linux, it is called "bond" which uses LACP for bonding interfaces into one logical. However this requires support on the side of the switch as well (it needs to be configured, not sure if home switches are capable of such a thing). Even then one single connection will not be able to pass through more than a single link capacity (it is based on hashes of some header fields - which in communication between 2 nodes and the same service will be the same).
Another problem is routing because you have two separate L3 ports, your routing computation needs to be deterministic - therefore you can choose only one interface at a time for your usage.
What you could achieve is: consider you are running a few virtual machines, you will grant them access to ethernet (bridge the interface) and you will continue to use the wifi only. This way your throughput could rise over the limit of ethernet, but is a very specific scenario.
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
add a comment |
Simply: No, you cannot achieve that.
You may consider a solution that is easier: you have 2 ethernet interfaces and want to use them both. In Linux, it is called "bond" which uses LACP for bonding interfaces into one logical. However this requires support on the side of the switch as well (it needs to be configured, not sure if home switches are capable of such a thing). Even then one single connection will not be able to pass through more than a single link capacity (it is based on hashes of some header fields - which in communication between 2 nodes and the same service will be the same).
Another problem is routing because you have two separate L3 ports, your routing computation needs to be deterministic - therefore you can choose only one interface at a time for your usage.
What you could achieve is: consider you are running a few virtual machines, you will grant them access to ethernet (bridge the interface) and you will continue to use the wifi only. This way your throughput could rise over the limit of ethernet, but is a very specific scenario.
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
add a comment |
Simply: No, you cannot achieve that.
You may consider a solution that is easier: you have 2 ethernet interfaces and want to use them both. In Linux, it is called "bond" which uses LACP for bonding interfaces into one logical. However this requires support on the side of the switch as well (it needs to be configured, not sure if home switches are capable of such a thing). Even then one single connection will not be able to pass through more than a single link capacity (it is based on hashes of some header fields - which in communication between 2 nodes and the same service will be the same).
Another problem is routing because you have two separate L3 ports, your routing computation needs to be deterministic - therefore you can choose only one interface at a time for your usage.
What you could achieve is: consider you are running a few virtual machines, you will grant them access to ethernet (bridge the interface) and you will continue to use the wifi only. This way your throughput could rise over the limit of ethernet, but is a very specific scenario.
Simply: No, you cannot achieve that.
You may consider a solution that is easier: you have 2 ethernet interfaces and want to use them both. In Linux, it is called "bond" which uses LACP for bonding interfaces into one logical. However this requires support on the side of the switch as well (it needs to be configured, not sure if home switches are capable of such a thing). Even then one single connection will not be able to pass through more than a single link capacity (it is based on hashes of some header fields - which in communication between 2 nodes and the same service will be the same).
Another problem is routing because you have two separate L3 ports, your routing computation needs to be deterministic - therefore you can choose only one interface at a time for your usage.
What you could achieve is: consider you are running a few virtual machines, you will grant them access to ethernet (bridge the interface) and you will continue to use the wifi only. This way your throughput could rise over the limit of ethernet, but is a very specific scenario.
edited Mar 13 at 11:52
answered Mar 13 at 7:08
ILikeMatDotHILikeMatDotH
915
915
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
add a comment |
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
Yeah. I expected something like that: there is a technology for it, but it would be unimplementable in this context. It's nice to learn about LACP though.
– Allan Deamon
Mar 13 at 8:07
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f506016%2fuse-different-connections-wifi-ethernet-to-increase-speed-on-lan%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown