Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bignose2]

Hi,

Been with AAISP bonded lines for a few years now, internet is great, double speed, all good.

But quite often I do find WiFi calling breaks up, sometime to the point it cuts off & simply too broken to use.

95% of the time its OK & with friend family tend to use whatsapp voice & that is OK.

Increasingly (it feels like) that 5% seems to happen on the really important calls & end up using the land line

Have asked tech a while ago, they adjusted "filter", I thought slightly better but still happens.
"
Regrettably this is an issue with Wifi-Calling because it was never designed to work with a bonded service but a single connection sending the data which can result in what's happening, audio cutting etc. I've applied a 95% filter for both lines to try and give more headroom for VOIP but I suspect this might not make much difference due to the way Wifi-Calling works conflicting to bonding which allows all traffic to come across multiple lines acting as one.
"

They have suggested removing 1 incoming line temp but as is so intermattant & just impossible to test as could go days OK.

Has anyone experienced this, also when they say VOIP in general, that must be a big problem. I don't really use VOIP, I assume WhatsApp is pure internet?

I am seriously thinking changing to just load balancing, appartantly they can do that with the firebrick, not ideal, would still be good & don't really need the full 140mb DL, 70Mbps+ is fine, trouble is upload is 24Mb max (12mb + 12mb) & that is not so good.

Why can't rural'ish areas get FTTP quicker, waited ages for FTTC, I know its coming but always the last! one day might even get a mobile signal, just been waiting 30 years for that. Sorry rant over, all these things have been a pain recently

Any experience or advise, would be good to know if somehow wifi calling been OK but of course majority have a mobile signal as home/office.


 

[dee.jay]

Funnily enough I had bonded AAISP lines at one point and I was massively disappointed, a lot of things I need to download simply just did not work at all with the solution being to use one line for most things. I binned one line off within a month or two of moving my 2nd line to AAISP. I had a Firebrick (which I did not like at all) and all the recommended configuration too.

[Alex Atkin UK]

The flip side is load balancing is getting increasingly problematic as it upsets sites using CAPTCHAs, they tend to trigger when the IP changes and a couple of sites I had to force down a single WAN as they wouldn't pass the test at all.  As the problem spread I switched to load balancing Steam IP addresses specifically, of course its not a big deal for me as my connections are both Gigabit to begin with.

I suppose its possible it might not happen so much if both IPs are from the same ISP, have no way to test that.

[dee.jay]

The flip side is load balancing is getting increasingly problematic as it upsets sites using CAPTCHAs, they tend to trigger when the IP changes and a couple of sites I had to force down a single WAN as they wouldn't pass the test at all.  As the problem spread I switched to load balancing Steam IP addresses specifically, of course its not a big deal for me as my connections are both Gigabit to begin with.

I suppose its possible it might not happen so much if both IPs are from the same ISP, have no way to test that.

In pfSense you can “sticky” connections and that is a decent workaround. For most of my heavy downloading comes from specific IPs I can just put them in a rule directed at the gateway group.

[Alex Atkin UK]

In pfSense you can “sticky” connections and that is a decent workaround. For most of my heavy downloading comes from specific IPs I can just put them in a rule directed at the gateway group.

But sticky effectively prevents balancing as downloads coming from the same IP will never get sped up.

Like you said, policy routing is really the way to go but its problematic when it starts to impact a lot of sites and if those sites are sharing IPs so you end up slowly disabling balancing again.  Its why I did the reverse and policy route the balancing rather than trying to add exceptions to it.

[dee.jay]

Yes, that is what I did in the end - i.e. policy what needed balancing.

[bogof]

There must be technical issues around such issues - ie where your traffic enters and exits the internet via a single IP address, but with the bonding happening on the transport between the sites?

[meritez]

There must be technical issues around such issues - ie where your traffic enters and exits the internet via a single IP address, but with the bonding happening on the transport between the sites?

If the wifi calling is relying on Layer 2 networking, there is no real work around.

[bogof]

If the wifi calling is relying on Layer 2 networking, there is no real work around.

I might be misunderstanding, but I thought all mobile phone provider WiFi calling must be layer 3 - it's routed via users own WiFi connections to whatever internet access is available.  Layer 2 would imply some kind of proprietary arrangement which I don't think exists.

[XGS_Is_On]

WiFi calling brings up a VPN between phone and mobile network so at least layer 3 and potentially layer 4 to traverse NAT.