Comments on: Wireless connection teaming. http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/wireless-connection-teaming/ Sat, 26 May 2012 19:26:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: astronomer http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/wireless-connection-teaming/#comment-38882 astronomer Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:39:20 +0000 #comment-38882 As you can see from the other replies, this is not a trivial problem with two separate ISPs. I suggest you check out the cost of going to a single connection with greater bandwidth. If you drop one of the ISPs and increase bandwidth on the other, you may see a significant savings and will bypass the routing issues raised by using two providers. Depending on your relationship with your neighbor, this is probably the least expensive option. rt As you can see from the other replies, this is not a trivial problem with two separate ISPs. I suggest you check out the cost of going to a single connection with greater bandwidth. If you drop one of the ISPs and increase bandwidth on the other, you may see a significant savings and will bypass the routing issues raised by using two providers.
Depending on your relationship with your neighbor, this is probably the least expensive option.
rt

]]> By: brandonbates http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/wireless-connection-teaming/#comment-38883 brandonbates Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:54:51 +0000 #comment-38883 I've looked into this quite a bit. Basically yes and no. Without device somewhere in a rack at a co-location facility, you will not be able to download a SINGLE file or stream faster. Now, that said, there are some things it is possible to do. There are commercial products such as FatPipe that do pretty much what you are trying to do, the trick is like I said they don't speed it up for a single download (If you use a multi stream download manager such as getright you can work around this too) but FatPipe is pretty expensive. The other methods are complex and not very easy to do, but would theoretically work. Take a look at: http://linux-ip.net/html/adv-multi-internet.html ** http://www.linux.com.lb/wiki/index.pl?node=Load%20Balancing%20Across%20Multiple%20Links http://www.samag.com/documents/s=1824/sam0201h/0201h.htm http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html There's several other articles out there but all basically the same thing. If you don't have a spare computer to use as a linux router, create a virtual server by downloading the free vmware server www.vmware.com I personally opted for a faster link. I’ve looked into this quite a bit. Basically yes and no. Without device somewhere in a rack at a co-location facility, you will not be able to download a SINGLE file or stream faster. Now, that said, there are some things it is possible to do. There are commercial products such as FatPipe that do pretty much what you are trying to do, the trick is like I said they don’t speed it up for a single download (If you use a multi stream download manager such as getright you can work around this too) but FatPipe is pretty expensive. The other methods are complex and not very easy to do, but would theoretically work. Take a look at:
<a href="http://linux-ip.net/html/adv-multi-internet.html" rel="nofollow">http://linux-ip.net/html/adv-multi-internet.html</a> **
<a href="http://www.linux.com.lb/wiki/index.pl?node=Load%20Balancing%20Across%20Multiple%20Links" rel="nofollow">http://www.linux.com.lb/wiki/index.pl?node=Load%20Balancing%20Across%20Multiple%20Links</a>
<a href="http://www.samag.com/documents/s=1824/sam0201h/0201h.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.samag.com/documents/s=1824/sam0201h/0201h.htm</a>
<a href="http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html" rel="nofollow">http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html</a>

There’s several other articles out there but all basically the same thing.

If you don’t have a spare computer to use as a linux router, create a virtual server by downloading the free vmware server <a href="http://www.vmware.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vmware.com</a>

I personally opted for a faster link.

]]>