schizznick

I would add that even with Band Steering, the client device decides which WiFi to connect to, also the Client would need to support band steering for it to even work. Otherwise all the router does is try and fake out the device to force it to switch but again it's up to the client device and some devices can be rather sticky and not switch no matter how hard the AP tries.

So the above solution could help, but in most cases DDOS mitigation has to happen upstream. Once the upstream router encodes the attack packets onto the wire it's too late, your pipe is already affected before it even hits your FW/Router. If DDOS is a serious issue you could look at a VPN type service that offers that and run the game through that. However in reality costs for that are not usually cheap. In reality you cannot prevent a DDOS attack only mitigate it.

I would agree, Cable Internet is vary distance sensitive so testing at random customer locations will give you randomly different latencies. Fiber Optic on the other hand will tend to have less deviation. Looking at the chart though they must have been all over the place for testing.

PON is a special kind of fiber optic and often requires proprietary ONT's. However most of those ONT's do have a bridge mode which would turn off everything except the ethernet ports and allow you to plug in a router of your choosing. This however is a policy decision and may vary from carrier to carrier. I don't know of many carriers that will allow you to buy your own ONT, especially on PON.

I am a Mikrotik Trainer and avid user. After getting over the learning curve, I am Cisco guy, I have found them to be very useful and versatile. For the cost it's hard to find a better device.

Simple Queues are handled in software so anything that offloads to hardware (ie. Fasttrack) will skip any queues. If you go to the CLI and use /ip firewall then type export you can get all of the rules being used. Feel free to scrub that of personal data and post it I'll see what may be causing your issues. Maybe also do the same under /queue.

@Insprill. Have you checked that both SFP's are using the same wavelength? I see some mentioned 1310nm above. Both Modules have to talk the same wavelength, if not they will not see each other. Think of it like trying to connect to 2.4Ghz Wifi with a 5Ghz radio. They will not work.

I should also add, that speed has almost nothing to do with latency. You can have Gigabit ethernet and 200ms ping... and 30mb VDSL with 10ms ping so increasing speed may not improve gaming unless you have a saturation issue or a decrease in latency from something else such as a change in technology.

If you have a ping of 15 and someone has 8, they will in no way have an advantage over you. Most online games are designed to handle much higher pings so really in most cases anything under 100ms will have roughly the same experience. But definitely under 50 would have no noticeable difference. Latency is a measurement of time that a packet takes to travel to the destination and then back. Anything under 100ms is good, anything under 50 is excellent. Latency is often misunderstood... numerous things can affect it, such as: 1. Distance - The father you are the longer it takes. 2. Technology used - Wifi ads latency due to being Half Duplex 3. Number of Hops to destination - Each router the packet passes through ads some latency. Ultimately you will have no benefit going from 15ms to 8ms. If it really bothers you, then run a wire.

Your i3 should be fine with those games. Although a bottleneck between CPU and GPU might exist. More than likely, like Alex said it's an interference issue.

What does your redirect in php look like?

Can you expound more on the redirect? Is this an html redirect? What webserver are you using? Also if possible can you post the config, and scrub any private data?

An 802.11ax router still operates on any of the options available on those bands. An 802.11ax Router will still allow an N or G device to connect at N or G speeds. The issue becomes that the slower devices take up more airtime causing less to be available to the AX devices. Since 802.11ax devices are still new no company would sale an 802.11ax only device. Final Note Wifi6 requires certain hardware to support the new features as such a device built w/o wifi6 will most likely not support wifi6 at any time.

I've often seen Apple iOS Devices are bad when dealing with Upload.... they often are backing up photos and doing full backups. Otherwise glasswire is a great app to see if your PC's are doing something they shouldn't.

Cisco Meraki is a decent solution with great hardware. Mist owned by Juniper now is also a decent solution with some nice BLE functionality as well. If you want to Use Meraki on the cheap often people are selling the AP's on Ebay pretty cheap you just need to buy Licensing.

The closest I have been able to find is the old IBM token ring connector.

A Pi with a simple Python Script should easily handle it... usually an API guide from the manufacturer of the VOIP solution would give details. If you don't feel comfortable doing it you could hirer a coder. It's simple enough it may be a good idea to learn as a little bit of coding is never a bad thing.

I don't see that anyone mentioned that IPv6 does not have Port Forwarding, Port Forwarding is necessary when using NAT and IPv6 does not have NAT. All IPv6 IP's are internet route-able. Finally as was stated currently most providers utilize dual stack connections meaning both IPv4 and IPv6 at the same time. It's possible to use only IPv6 and a 6to4 solution to allow ipv4 access but that is unusual.

Does the VOIP solution have any sort of API, if it does a simplified version of your idea would be more stable. Using an Pi or Arduino when the button is pushed it calls the API instead of having to worry about SIP. However I have to agree with other posts and recommend letting someone else find a solution and take the liability.

Mail servers us SMTP to send and receive mail... so as was already stated it's not unusual for an ISP to block 25/465/587 which will prevent email from getting to the server. It often requires a business class service to get that to work.

To get google cache usually requires subscribers in the thousands. It took us years to get Google and Netflix to talk to us with 30k subscribers.

Microsoft created SSTP VPN's which use port 443 by default. This allows VPN access that is rarely blocked. It does have Linux/Unix support as well as windows support. It does support MAC but i've never used it on Mac personally.

ADSL uses one pair to provider internet, so technically a 2nd modem could be added and deliver a 2nd service. We often have 2-4 lines dropped to each customer allowing multiple services and/or bonding of ADSL and VDSL. I would contact your ISP and see if they can activate a service on the 2nd line. Now if it's a single phone line and they share pairs with the ADSL then you are limited to just the 1 service.

This is not generally possible, most ISP's separate customer traffic till it hits the Network Gateway/BRAS or whatever they happen to be using. For example we use QinQ or nested VLANs this prevents any customer from talking to any other customer without first traversing our router. Now it's possible some ISPs don't do this. However your example still works using public IP's with static routes to private networks. Without a firewall the router will route traffic allowing everything through provided it has a route to get to it. a /16 route would access everything in most consumer router private networks. I also want to add that the /64 in an IPv6 address is the subnet mask, it dictates how many IPs exist in that network. The Device however still only uses one of those IPs. It works the same as IPv4 routing. the WAN/TIP IP on the Phone in the example used before is part of the /64 used by the ISP/Carrier and a different /64 us handed out for LAN purposes in the case of Tethering, the phone uses 1 IP from that as the LAN gateway.

IPv6 can use DHCP just like IPv4, if you want absolute control you can do that. But what makes it easier is that you don't have to use DHCP, the Router advertises and the clients work. As for whitelisting you can allow specific ports as necessary just like IPv4 just without the NAT (or PAT to be precise). The issues Xbox and such have are usually with NAT which again does not exist in IPv6. For sending some traffic over a VPN no real difference that's a routing issue that can be achieved by destination instead of source, but if you need the control use DHCPv6. For most people IPv6 will be simpler, and work w/o an need to mess with it. In fact many of the issues customers have are related to NAT which we again resolve by going to IPv6, not to mention things like Multicast over the internet and IPSEC being built in will only improve what we can do on the internet. People fear it because it looks scary in reality it's not too bad, my biggest takeaway is that you really need a good DNS solution to manage it.