Satellite > WildBlue Satellite > [Exede] Exede and DSL

[Exede] Exede and DSL

reply to bobvick

Combining 2 connections is not fun, especially 2 unlike connections. There are some commercial devices that can do it, but they are not cheap and they don't give you much control over which connection it uses. And honestly, I have never seen one work very well with the exception of MLPPP which can't be done here. It would be better to just have 2 routers, one for each service.

I'd just stick with the DSL and save your money.

reply to bobvick
If you do need additional bandwidth, I'd add a second DSL line. If your existing ISP (BellSouth/AT&T?) won't sell you another one, check with a CLEC like Covad or XO; or your city's cable television supplier.

reply to bobvick
I routinely use multiple connections simultaneously. I have never found a multi-WAN router that was versatile enough for me, so I do it "manually."

At the moment, for example, I am using 3 connections. One is a WiFi connection in an RV park where I am for a few days (Santa Fe, NM). One is a 4G Verizon air card (5GB plan) and one is a 4G Droid on an unlimited plan.

All are wired to this computer directly, using three routers for the first two, with the Droid tethered

The primary thing that I have to do involves routing statements (Route Add, and Route Delete) which are normally done from a command line. In my earliest incarnation of this arrangement I had a series of named batch files that were used to direct traffic. Eventually I wrote a program that is a series of dropdown boxes and either named routes, or text boxes in which IPs can be entered.

The top box is the default connection. The next is the IP range for my business VPN. Others can be used to point to specific download sources, etc. Setting the dropdowns to my choice of connection, then clicking OK, clears all routes and resets them to my current choices.

Not for everyone, but it works absolutely perfectly for me, and I've been doing it for a few years. My mix includes two satellite connections, but since neither is as fast as any of the other three I have right now, I am electing to use neither. That will change next week when dry-camping at the Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta, where I will be sharing the satellite connections with others via WiFi.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool

Thanks a lot for all of your suggestions. CenturyLink is the ILEC here, no cable out to where I live. I actually get the 4.0 as a mistake on CTL's behalf. When my neighbor had naked DSL for a while without a phone, he accidentally got upgraded to 4.0, I called and they upgrade my provision as well. In their system now, 1.5 is the fastest they show for my location. They said since I was provisioned for the 4.0 and it worked well they would leave it
at the faster speed since it worked, but they "technically" don't offer the 4.0 to my location. I will probably just end up doing two separate networks, sounds easier.

reply to bobvick
I agree with the others that Exede would be a disappointment compared to DSL. Do not be fooled by their up to speeds of 12 Mb/s for download and 3 Mb/s for upload. Those speeds are not guaranteed.

reply to bobvick
What is the latency of your DSL? ~65ms? Exede is probably going to run about 550-600ms. Despite the 12mbps, the web pages will probably seem to load about the same speed as they do on 4mbps due to the latency, possibly slower.

HomeFusion would perform better.

reply to bobvick

Run from satellite just run!

The Network Management Policy resumed on my spot beam a few months ago. It sucks. On September 30, Networx reports that I downloaded 3.35 GB during a 22.5 hour period. The average download speed was 347 kb/s while it is advertised as 512 kb/s. It was fast during the am hours and begin slowing at about 9 am. It did not speed up until 10:30 pm. During some periods of the day and evening, it was slower than dial-up. 3 downloads crashed due to slow speed amounting to about 45% of what I attempted to download and requiring me to restart them. Factoring in the crashes, the effective average speed was 191 kb/s.

That is typical of performance on beam 31 for the last 3 years except for a few months last spring and early summer while Exede was trying to trick customers into believing otherwise. In time spot beams for Exede will be overstuffed and underserved too.
--
Wildblue Value Pack, beam 31, Riverside gateway

reply to bobvick

Re: [Exede] Exede and DSL

I wouldn't say it is a myth. That's simply how DSL works. When comparing 4mbps DSL to Exede, there really isn't much of a comparison. The DSL will have a much lower latency.

The only time DSL latency is really out of your normal 25-80ms is when congestion is present or when you are really far out and interleaving and possibly extender technologies (such as Go Digital) are in use. Despite what it appears on this website, congestion to the point of service being degraded on DSL is relativity rare. Interleaving and extender technologies don't really add that much latency to a service, especially when compared to satellite.

The At&t lawsuit had to do with A&t provisioning speeds below what customers were paying for, making it impossible to ever achieve the rates customers were paying for. It has very little to do with the actual performance of DSL.

That speedtest is not normal DSL. And yes, DSL will suck compared to Comcast. The technology is simply not comparable unless you have VDSL, which even then won't be comparable because At&t does not allow you to utilize it to the full potential. VDSL2 can move 100mbps in the field and in theory can move 100mbps, both ways.