Falcon1986

Admittedly, Ubiquiti's line of AirMax/UISP products are intended for operators who already have experience with their products. Documentation is not the best and a lot is left to be figured out. So, what I gathered from this is that the AirCube-ISP wasn't getting enough power over PoE. I have both the ER-X and ER-X-SFP, and know from previous experience that you need to use a separate 24V/12W power adapter to push power out of that passthrough port. The 12V/0.5A adapter that comes with the ER-X is only sufficient to power the ER-X alone. You have to buy the higher voltage adapter separately.

@ID0 Wanted to clarify: Are you powering the AirCube-ISP via PoE from the ER-X's passthrough PoE output? If so, are you powering the ER-X with the 12V/0.5A power adapter that came in box?

This highlights that you should find out from the person who pays. ISPs are known to allow for higher-than-normal "burst" speeds when their network isn't congested. Furthermore, if your ISP has speed test servers that are part of speedtest.net, speeds can seem higher than what you're paying for. You might just be on a 48-50Mbps internet connection, that occasionally bursts to 100Mbps. What are your speeds at fast.com, openspeedtest.com and waveform? I'd have to disagree. Different generations of WiFi are able to achieve different speeds. Most of us who used 802.11b/g hardware will know. Furthermore, most people's WiFi setups are sub-optimally set up. I'm not arguing with that. It was a simple question. You'd be surprised at how many people reveal their setups until the 10th reply in and that's where we discover something problematic. Unfortunately, we're not mind readers here. A fast and easy solution doesn't fit everyone. If you're patient enough and can constructively participate in the conversation, someone will help you find a solution.

@Avocheeseado So is this layout correct? SPNMX55 -> PowerLine -> BT Mesh node

What would be very helpful is a network diagram with make/model labels for all relevant hardware and how they're interconnected. PL can be blamed for a lot of speed and latency issues. It's one piece of network technology that is plagued with problems. If you're using them, I assume you would have accepted these limitations. So you have 2 routers connected to each other? This is the setup that your ISP put in your home? Are these speed tests performed while connecting over WiFi? How far are you from the mesh node? My memory of house construction in the UK is that even internal walls are made of thick, solid brick. If the WiFi going through walls/floors when you're doing these speed tests?

Are these the speeds that you're paying your ISP for? What is the type of internet connection? WiFi speeds are much more variable than ethernet. If you're in 2.4GHz from the WiFi 4/5 generation, for example, you're unlikely to ever reach 100Mbps in real-world scenarios. Additionally, the rate at which device A is able to send data to device B on the LAN is dependent on the speed of CPU/storage hardware on each device. Post a network diagram sketch, highlighting the exact make/models of all network devices and how they're connected.

What do they provide? Wireless? Ethernet? What are you calling slow? Wireless? Ethernet?

Most common cause is wireless interference. Interference can be due to overlap with your neighbours' WiFi broadcasts or other appliances that use the same bands as WiFi (e.g. cordless phones, Bluetooth, etc.). You can detect the former with a WiFi Analyzer tool. When you reboot the wireless router, you force it to scan the spectrum for the best available channel (provided the antenna channel selection is to 'auto'). That is a temporary fix because if the spectrum in your area is already heavily congested, it's only a matter of time before a neighbour's broadcast decides to overlap with yours again.

You're on WiFi. There's always latency on WiFi. Ethernet. Plug in directly.

As in the ethernet link to the PC goes through an ethernet coupler? What type of ethernet cables are you using? A make/model would be very helpful.

This is a very specific problem that the ISP's technical support (higher level of technical knowledge) should be able to help you with. Seeing as there may be very few people on this forum who can help (I'll call out @Alex Atkin UK since he's familiar with UK ISP stuff), I'd suggest you ask in the Plusnet Community forum. At this point, since you're using your own hardware, you've isolated yourself to being "your own support". May I ask why you chose to replace the ISP's gateway with the TD-W9960? Comparing the specifications of it to the Plusnet Hub One, I'd be interested in knowing what you upgraded.

Definitely! Unless your ISP does not care about who connects to their fiber network, they usually have to authorize access by allowing not just the right credentials, but the right hardware signature. They should also be helpful in getting you set up faster than what we are "guessing" that you need to do.

I don't think you're supposed to edit anything on the TR069 connection profile. That's the ISP's "back door" into your ONT. IP acquisition should be set to DHCP on this connection. Look for another connection profile like "Internet". You should be able to use PPPoE credentials there.

That's the problem with Powerline. The quality of the link between the 2 adapters can change dramatically when appliances on the same circuit turn on/off. Power-cycling each adapter forces them to re-sync, but that's only temporary. In my opinion, Powerline should have been retired a long time ago. Because of its frequent link problems, it should only be used in peripheral applications where clients don't need much bandwidth or uptime. You're stuck with doing what you're doing now unless you link the modem to router with ethernet.

This is what happens when you're an early adopter. You'll have to deal with all of the incompatibilities and quirks until more people start using the technology. Not sure what is "dishonest". Here is what I think you're not fully understanding. While your XB8 has a 6GHz antenna to broadcast WiFi to WiFi 6E clients, access won't necessarily be available all of the time, especially when you realize that the wider you go on channel width on 6GHz (and even on 5GHz), you're bound to overlap with DFS channels. 6GHz is not exactly an "unoccupied" band; like 5GHz, it's utilized by "incumbent services" like microwave, satellite, mobile, astronomy, etc. If any of these services are being heavily used in your area, they can interfere with your signal. OK. So you seem to be upgrading all of the WiFi adapters but not taking one other thing into consideration. While adapter upgrades [and relevant driver upgrades] from one generation to the other will generally work for most people, you haven't really upgraded the physical antennae. In the majority of cases, this is not relevant, but keep in mind that the antennae that came with your laptops were tuned for the adapters that were placed in them from the factory. Upgrading the adapter, especially in a laptop that isn't too old, should still work, but it likely won't work as well compared to devices that came with WiFi 6E/7 directly from the manufacturer; e.g. your phone.

Who is your ISP? Flow, Digicel, Starlink? Are you running these tests over WiFi, ethernet, through any other medium (e.g. Powerline, WiFi extenders, etc)? Is anything else running in the background (either locally or on the network) that might be consuming bandwidth at the same time?

So the PC(s) with the WiFi 6E adapters can see the 6GHz but cannot connect to the network?

Without reliable speeds, this will be difficult to do. If QoS is the only setting available for traffic shaping, then you might have to use the slowest speeds and live with that. If your router supported CoDel or fq_codel, you would get the dynamic adjustment that you want.

And what did WiFi Analyzer show?

How far are you from the XB8 when this happens? Do you have a separate SSID for the 6GHz band? Or does the XB8 give all bands the same SSID? Assess the strength of the 6GHz signal from the same computer using WiFi Analyzer. Post a screenshot.

Well, we never knew an XB8 existed until here. We don't all use Shaw to know this. Your 6GHz signal is coming from the XB8, not the RAX43. Phones tend to perform better with WiFi than computers for several reasons. But you should realize that 6GHz has an even shorter range than 5GHz. If an imaginary straight line drawn between your device and the XB8 encounters walls/floors with distance, then a 6GHz signal will be significantly attenuated by the time it reaches you. Being of 2 different brands, they're unlikely to be able to communicate in this manner. Even if they did, it would be at the expense of one band and, at that point, you're sacrificing speed and latency for coverage. A better way to do this would be to convert the RAX43 to AP mode and connect it to the XB8 via an ethernet uplink. You get a reliable wired backhaul that should always be at 1Gbps and can fully utilize all bands and ports on the RAX43.

If the TP-Link multi-WAN router has such a mode, that would be a silly mode to have. You'd essentially be turning it into a switch, unless it has the ability to keep all of it's advanced features (such as load balancing). These multi-WAN routers are purpose-built for small business applications that have specific needs. There's no need to have "alternate modes". But why don't you examine the router's interface yourself? I'm assuming you have one of TP-Link's multi-WAN routers. This is where marrying home user functions and business functions don't always go hand in hand. Deco is meant for home use. So no surprise that it comes with parental controls that can be managed in the app. Multi-WAN routers are intended for business or advanced home setups where you're likely to have other ways of content filtering and restrictions. In this specific situation, I couldn't find "parental controls" in the TP-Link emulator for the ER605. If you need both dual-WAN and parental controls with what you have now, then I guess that justifies multiple layers of NAT. I suggest you try the configuration and see if there are any issues to be concerned about at all. What I think you need here is a multi-WAN mesh home WiFi system. Unfortunately, I don't think TP-Link carries this kind of system. Even the new Archer BE800 with its dual 10Gb LAN/WAN ports will only use 1 for WAN. You'll more likely see these kind of features with Asus/AiMesh and Synology hardware. I subscribe to that channel and recalled seeing that video.

This is where stating pertinent information from the start could have saved a lot of misinterpretation. Never will be. All of the ethernet ports can only go at a maximum rate of 1Gbps. Higher aggregate/cumulative speeds of the WLAN are possible, but most home users don't care about it. Shaw/XB8 (WiFi 6E, tri-band) ---> 1GbE ---> RAX43 (WiFi 6, dual-band) Tests seem to have been done over WiFi 6E to the XB8 resulting in that screenshot @jre84 - Hopefully, you've configured the RAX43 in AP mode if you're concerned about double-NAT and port forwarding.

As in the PHY speed or local speed tests? Not sure what your S21 Ultra was seeing especially given what @Lurick pointed out about your router's specifications. Port aggregation has to be supported on both the router and the modem for that to work. When it comes to multi-gig internet connections, you have to make sure that your ports can exceed the speeds you'll be paying for. So, in your situation, you're looking at 2.5Gbps or better. This takes into consideration various overheads that can drop the speed and it also should provide you with hardware that can handle WAN-to-LAN or LAN-to-WAN speeds that high. Having gigabit ports doesn't necessarily mean that the hardware can perform transfers at gigabit speeds. The CPU/chipset/cooling must be up to the task.

Depends on how load balancing is set up in your router. You should learn how load balancing works, especially as it applies to your multi-WAN router. Watch the section of same video as it applies to policy routing. You can create groups of devices then assign those groups to a particular WAN. Theoretically, if your internet speeds are slower than the maximum that the Deco can handle, speeds should be minimally affected. At higher internet connection speeds, you might hit a limit since anything plugged in to that WAN port will have to negotiate at least 2 firewalls. Placing a "router" in bridge/passthrough mode or AP mode, releases CPU resources to achieve higher speeds doing other tasks. Where multiple layers of NAT come in to play is intermittent interruptions from internal IP renewals (DHCP), potential IP conflicts if both networks are within the same subnet, and firewall-related issues (routing from the WAN, through the first network and then the second, etc.). Unless you have a specific reason to run mesh units in their default mode behind a dual-WAN router, I'd run them in AP mode. I don't think Deco and Omada integrate with each other at this time even if they're both from TP-Link. Using them together will come with compromises. Again, watch the video. Technically, if you configure policy routing properly, the chosen WAN should only depend on the client, not the AP through which the client connects. Explore the Omada policy routing interface.