Best approach to Dual ISP situation

[notneps]

I run a business out of my home. It's gotten to the point where the lost revenue from a few hours of downtime when my ISP goes down is worth more than the monthly bill for another DSL line. I know very little about networking; I've tried to read as much about the subject as I can, but the huge amount of material available did confuse me a little. Because Tom's Hardware has never failed me I'd like to ask the great minds that hang around here.

Information: The internet in my area is VERY unreliable. You can expect at least one outage a month that will last for several hours at least. This goes for ALL available ISPs.

What I have:
3 DSL connections:
-one 25 Mbps
-one 3 Mbps
-one 2 Mbps

Network:
Two workstations (Gigabit)
One server (hypervisor/media/storage) running Windows Server 2012 R2
2-5 laptops (sometimes plugged in with 100Mbps ethernet, sometimes WiFi)
5-10 Smartphones
A TV box
A FreeNAS box
One 8-port gigabit switch
One 8-port 10/100 switch
3 Wifi router/modems (ISP provided, from the three different ISPs)

What I want to do:
Either:
(a) Bond the three connections with either a multi-WAN router that supports it or with a router I'll make myself out of some old network cards and a linux box, to get the most out of my bandwidth. Or, if that is not possible or is too tricky to set up;
(b) Use the three connections in a failover setup, where when the primary connection fails my network automatically switches over to the second connection, then to the third, continuously pinging an IP over the currently downed connection (say maybe the ISP's DNS server) so it knows when to switch back again to it.
(c) a third option that I am unaware of?

What I want to know:
-What is the best way to achieve (a) or, if it's not possible/practical, (b)?
-Would a router that supports (a) be prohibitively expensive? What price range could I expect? I browsed through listings but the spec sheets only confused me.
-What additional equipment would I need, if any? (multi-WAN router, anything else I might not have mentioned).

Any help would be greatly appreciated.





My network:

 

[Solandri]

If you're in the U.S., be aware that "different" DSL companies typically just rent equipment and lines from your local phone company. That is, the phone company is the one providing your DSL regardless of who is providing the Internet connection over that DSL.

So 3 DSL lines may not be as reliable as you think they will be. If the outage is due to a problem with a single DSL line, then yes the other two lines will keep you connected. But if the outage is due to a problem with your phone company's equipment or their outbound connection, then all three DSL lines will go down simultaneously.

To get true redundancy, your internet connections need to be completely different. e.g. One DSL line, one cable modem, one wifi Internet service, one 4G cellular service link. Normally, wifi Internet is too slow and 4G has too low a bandwidth cap to be useful as your primary Internet connection. But if they're only being used as fallback connections, then they will suffice.

Satellite may seem to be an option, but they typically use satellite for the downlink, DSL for the uplink. Bidirectional satellite connections are typically slow and horrendously expensive - like $1/MB or more. Though there is an unlimited service at 9.6 kbps for $150/mo (Globalstar).

Depending on what exactly you're doing, it may be advantageous to locate your server at a hosting service with guaranteed connectivity, and have your other devices connect to it remotely.

 

[fudgecakes99]

So the issue is that your internet goes out across all wired networks in your area? Then the solution, would be to invest into a single satellite solution. As far as i understand it's guaranteed reliability no matter where you are, though you will have higher ping you play games, so far at least in my area the only ones providing that service is comcast, and i've heard some horror stories from friends and just general horrible customer support. I'd shop around for a satellite service of some kind in your area.

 

[notneps]

fudgecakes99: So the issue is that your internet goes out across all wired networks in your area?

Nope, they don't go out across all wired networks. What I mean is that all networks suffer from occasional outrages (independent of each other). What I need is some sort of load balancing solution, so my network is automatically switched over to a backup connection when the primary connection goes down.

If you're in the U.S., be aware that "different" DSL companies typically just rent equipment and lines from your local phone company. That is, the phone company is the one providing your DSL regardless of who is providing the Internet connection over that DSL.
So 3 DSL lines may not be as reliable as you think they will be. If the outage is due to a problem with a single DSL line, then yes the other two lines will keep you connected. But if the outage is due to a problem with your phone company's equipment or their outbound connection, then all three DSL lines will go down simultaneously.

I don't live in the US. The three ISPs are also three different phone companies. I actually have three different landline numbers, one bundled with each connection. They've never all gone down simultaneously. The only reason I'm looking for a solution is at the moment, whenever I lose connectivity on my main DSL line, I go through the process of unplugging it and plugging it in directly to a laptop and constantly pinging something to wait until it goes back up, while I manually plug in the cable from my second router into my switch. Then switching back when it's all over. The process is tedious and I want an automated system that will handle the load balancing/failover for me.

To get true redundancy, your internet connections need to be completely different. e.g. One DSL line, one cable modem, one wifi Internet service, one 4G cellular service link. Normally, wifi Internet is too slow and 4G has too low a bandwidth cap to be useful as your primary Internet connection. But if they're only being used as fallback connections, then they will suffice.

An LTE pocket WiFi hotspot is my last line of defense. If that fails too I can also use a few phones as WiFi hotspots. But that's what should happen after all three DSL lines simultaneously fail, which has never happened.

Depending on what exactly you're doing, it may be advantageous to locate your server at a hosting service with guaranteed connectivity, and have your other devices connect to it remotely.

Hehe you're absolutely right! No way I'd host critical stuff on a home server with my crappy connections. I use a combination of shared webhosting, VPSs, and a dedicated server hosted elsewhere by dedicated providers for things that need that kind of uptime.

The problem isn't redundancy, I already have enough of that. What I'm trying to figure out is how to set up my network so that it requires no manual work from me when switching connections in the event one line fails. I was thinking about getting a router like this one:

http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-R470T-Broadband-Changeable-Ethernet/dp/B005SYQBN8/ref=cm_rdp_product

Is this the answer to my problem? Or something like it?

 

[bill001g]

Lets say YOU are the router and want to switch connection what do you use to determine a connection is down. Now how would you make a router do that.

This is the key problem. You can't obviously just look at the DSL or ethernet port in most cases those provide power/are up even when they do not work. How much traffic loss is acceptable before you call it down, what happens if some sites are reachable but not others.

The cheap dual wan router you can get are very limited some have the ability to ping some addresses but it is very limited in its ability to detect outage. They can solve the total failure case but not a lot else.

The way this is done on a large company is they run a routing protocol like BGP. This is constantly sending data similar to ping to ensure the connection is up. It also sends data about the ability to reach location on the internet so you will know for example if you lose connection to some sites and not others. This is not a option even for a medium size company.

You can't really bond connection because the ip addresses are different you can if you try send some traffic one way and other traffic another but you can not do this randomly. The best example are games that have a login server and game server if you would get different ip because you load balanced it would cause massive issues. The routers of course have no way to know these relationships unless you tell them which tends to be very tedious.

There are services that claim to do this via a VPN type connection but almost all completely ignore the issue of packet out of order which causes end devices to retransmit data because they think it is lost which causes outages and slowness. Ones that correct for the packet out of order then have to delay data artificially which itself causes issues. So the best use of multiple connections is for backup

 

[notneps]

Lets say YOU are the router and want to switch connection what do you use to determine a connection is down. Now how would you make a router do that.

This is the key problem. You can't obviously just look at the DSL or ethernet port in most cases those provide power/are up even when they do not work. How much traffic loss is acceptable before you call it down, what happens if some sites are reachable but not others.

The cheap dual wan router you can get are very limited some have the ability to ping some addresses but it is very limited in its ability to detect outage. They can solve the total failure case but not a lot else.

The way this is done on a large company is they run a routing protocol like BGP. This is constantly sending data similar to ping to ensure the connection is up. It also sends data about the ability to reach location on the internet so you will know for example if you lose connection to some sites and not others. This is not a option even for a medium size company.

You can't really bond connection because the ip addresses are different you can if you try send some traffic one way and other traffic another but you can not do this randomly. The best example are games that have a login server and game server if you would get different ip because you load balanced it would cause massive issues. The routers of course have no way to know these relationships unless you tell them which tends to be very tedious.

There are services that claim to do this via a VPN type connection but almost all completely ignore the issue of packet out of order which causes end devices to retransmit data because they think it is lost which causes outages and slowness. Ones that correct for the packet out of order then have to delay data artificially which itself causes issues. So the best use of multiple connections is for backup

So for failover (not load balance) the router would be perfect?

 

[bill001g]

Perfectly not likely but it will work for the most common type of outage.

 

[kelix09]

This is for my cafe, both for online and lan gaming. I have 2 different Internet service provider Globelines (5mbps) and PLDT (8mbps). The reason for this is because Globelines always disconnects during rainydays. When either of the two fails there will always be a backup. Sticking to a single ISP for a shop is not a good idea.

 

[jsmithepa]

This is for my cafe, both for online and lan gaming. I have 2 different Internet service provider Globelines (5mbps) and PLDT (8mbps). The reason for this is because Globelines always disconnects during rainydays. When either of the two fails there will always be a backup. Sticking to a single ISP for a shop is not a good idea.

Great. So does this failover happens unattended? and what equipment you are using to accomplish that?

 

[fudgecakes99]

But, if you went satellite you'd cut out the entire connection problem all together, you'd probably save money, satellite speeds are at an upwards of 50 megabits a second. Much faster then the 25 megabits 2 megabits and 3 megabits. Just buy a couple routers, and you would be set? Unless you have a specific reason for having multiple connections.

 

[bill001g]

But, if you went satellite you'd cut out the entire connection problem all together, you'd probably save money, satellite speeds are at an upwards of 50 megabits a second. Much faster then the 25 megabits 2 megabits and 3 megabits. Just buy a couple routers, and you would be set? Unless you have a specific reason for having multiple connections.

I am strongly suspecting you never have actually used satellite internet. First I have never see one anywhere close to 50m but that is not the real issue anyway the huge problem is the data caps are very low. You might as well just use mobile broadband where you get similar speeds and similar caps.

The reason I know you have never used satelite internet is to even try to claim it does not have connection issues. Anyone that has used this know very well that you that a big rain storm will take you out until the storm has passed. Even fairly minor rain will degrade the speed.

 

[fudgecakes99]

But, if you went satellite you'd cut out the entire connection problem all together, you'd probably save money, satellite speeds are at an upwards of 50 megabits a second. Much faster then the 25 megabits 2 megabits and 3 megabits. Just buy a couple routers, and you would be set? Unless you have a specific reason for having multiple connections.

I am strongly suspecting you never have actually used satellite internet. First I have never see one anywhere close to 50m but that is not the real issue anyway the huge problem is the data caps are very low. You might as well just use mobile broadband where you get similar speeds and similar caps.

The reason I know you have never used satelite internet is to even try to claim it does not have connection issues. Anyone that has used this know very well that you that a big rain storm will take you out until the storm has passed. Even fairly minor rain will degrade the speed.

No i have had satellite in the past. "Bandwidth" caps are about the same as a wired set up. Where i live. I've also never had any "outages" due to severe rain. I got around 50 megabits sometimes more some times less, but thats about an average. No fluctuations in speed during rain either ever actually. Other then the obvious ping issues on account of the connection traveling an insanely long distance, its was pretty darn reliable. Though i may not have encountered the same issues as you doesn't mean they don't exist, it does however mean that whomever you had as a provider sucked. Among other things.

 

[notneps]

UPDATE: I went out and bought a TPLink TL-R470T+. It works perfectly, with practically zero configuration required, balancing three different WANs on my network (it can support up to four different WANs). For the price (around 50 USD) it has a TON of features and is pound for pound the best router I've ever bought. Definitely recommend it to anyone who comes across this thread in a similar pickle as me.