73
top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

We can and have. It’s Multi-Link Operation (MLO) which was part of WiFi 7 standards. Here’s how it works.

My router has it and it is indeed quite fast, but it’s new technology. There are currently very few client devices that support MLO.

[-] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 4 points 2 months ago

Oh, but if you mean from different SSIDs then checkout load balancers like Speedify.

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.org 23 points 2 months ago

Because it's not useful. Two routers still share the same frequencies and thus can't send more data over the same air. A single router can already use multiple frequencies to increase throughput. You don't need two to do that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMO

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago

If you want to use multiple internet connections and combine their speed, that's possible. Dunno how though and I guess to work best it would need a server somewhere else like a VPN to manage the packets coming from different ips

[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Software defined wan (SDWAN) is the industry term for bundling multiple independent internet connections to maximise bandwidth.

[-] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 months ago

Can you explain what this "software defined x" means that you hear everywhere?

[-] elvith@feddit.org 5 points 2 months ago

Basically it means to not have a special designed hardware for task X but to do much of it in software which gives you more flexibility. And also let's you configure and use X a bit more flexible.

E.g. software defined networking: If you run several virtual machines on a server, you may define the whole network between them virtually in software instead of doing it on the hardware side. Sure, you still need an ethernet card in your server to connect it to other servers and the internet, but all load balancing, switches, firewalls, VLANs, etc. between the virtual machines (or containers) on your server are virtualized in software - or maybe eben between servers.

Same goes for e.g. Software Defined Radio. In the early days you had dedicated hardware to control the mobile network and the antennas and such. Today you "just" have the antenna and a transceiver that is capable of producing and receiving a wide range of signals and modulations. All encoding, decoding and interpretation the signals is done in software. If your hardware is capable enough, the upgrade from e.g. 4G to 5G may only be a software update for all base stations.

[-] Silentiea 1 points 2 months ago

But what about for services other than X, like Facebook or YouTube?

/j

[-] elvith@feddit.org 2 points 2 months ago

These are all software defined social networking, aren't they?

[-] Silentiea 2 points 2 months ago

I was just joking about the placeholder X being X (formerly Twitter)

[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The main ones I hear are software defined WAN. Which means you can do per application internet steering.

Software defined LAN is more about authorising specific applications to access the corporate lan.

[-] discozombie@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

SD-WAN includes that but it is not its sole purpose, although I agree most vendors will say that's what you want. WAN/Link Aggregation, Multilink Aggregation, Link Load Balancing, Equal Cost Multipath, WAN Virtualisation, etc are ways to bundle multiple links together.

In WIFI terms, it's called channel bonding, it was proprietary and various vendors had their own implementations, see "Super G".

[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I agree but most of the wan optimisers have rebranded to SDWAN because that was the hype about 7 years ago.

With wifi specifically yea, trying to multiplex a technology that is effectively a CSMA/CA is hard and there is no interoperability.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 months ago

Two APs should be on different channels so they don't interfere

[-] quixotic120@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

This exists, kind of

There’s bonded connections in several senses

Bonded ports but this doesn’t increase throughput in the way you’re thinking. eg if I bond 2 1 gigabit Ethernet ports I can’t connect at 2 gigabits, I can connect 2 users at up to one gigabit each (or several users totaling 2 gigabits but no 1 user at more than 1 gigabit)

bonding routers can take two internet connections and combine them, which is closer to what you are probably imagining. They combine throughput, eg a 100mbit connection and a 100mbit connection become a 200mbit connection although realistically it’s not that perfect and you have to get the right services for it, not just any connection will work, it’s a rabbit hole and generally much slower and worse latency than if you just got a traditional connection. Think people using starlink and 5g internet in rural settings

There’s also something called speedify, which is software that claims to do the above in software alone, bonds two connections to combine throughput. Never tried it, reviews are mixed. Some say it works, some say it’s spotty, some say you only get the speed of the one connection, etc.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 11 points 2 months ago

We had a guest speaker from ericson back when I was in uni. According to them that's been a thing for a while now

[-] LambdaRX@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

Just duckduckgo/mojeek your question. I got link to speedify for example.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago
[-] WhyAUsername_1@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Could you be any more wrong?

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

I'll give you an up vote as I want that to be a thing. "Let me Bing it for you"

[-] LambdaRX@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

If you mean that these search engines use Bing, than this is true only for DDG. Mojeek is independent.

[-] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 1 points 2 months ago

In case you’re wondering about the downvotes, using any search index verbification other than “Google” demonstrates greater techno-activism than pointing out that DDG uses the Bing API. Your effort has been noted, however, and will be evaluated at the next summit.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

The purposeful insinuation of a falsehood was enough to get people to admit that DDG is just Bing with a hat on while dogpiling on the assumed "mistake." I'll take it.

[-] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 2 months ago

Mmm, understood. Antiheroics are especially well-regarded. I’ll be sure this is accurately reflected in the report.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Make sure to note I'm really tall so I get preferential treatment due to their unconscious biases

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

I wonder if you configure them to be a trunk

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

probably because it’s more complicated than just improving the bandwidth on single wifi networks, which we have been making steady progress on. picking the low hanging fruit first.

[-] MHanak@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

My guess is that a network card can handle only one network at a time

this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
73 points (100.0% liked)

Showerthoughts

29571 readers
815 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS