starlink or wireless

Btone said:
no 5g and 4g is poor, part of the reason why ive fitted wireless into most of my sheds as 4g is so slow, so i don't think the "number of hops" as i would just show them the farm, as for them miss using it, they over in my house half the week anyway using it for "school projects" anyway, so if i can get good internet in their house is save me a fortune in food :) .
it more a speed/bandwidth thing, would a wireless link have enough ?
Click to expand...

For the distance you are taking about, a MikroTik 60GHz link would give you a 2Gbps link in clear weather and 600-900Mbps in the rain (which it will be given your location).

mikrotik.com

Wireless Wire nRAY | MikroTik

The most compact wireless 2 Gb/s aggregate link in the 1500 m range or more! Improved snow-resistant design is perfect for harsh weather environments. Cables can no longer limit you!
mikrotik.com mikrotik.com

Or this option has a 5GHz fallback to about 300Mbps if the weather really goes to heck in a handbasket.

mikrotik.com

Wireless Wire Cube Pro | MikroTik

A preconfigured kit of two Cube 60Pro ac (802.11ay 60 GHz) devices: the Wireless Wire Cube Pro. Just point the Cubes at one another and power them on! They will form a blazing fast encrypted wireless connection. Pure plug-and-play!
mikrotik.com mikrotik.com

And, as everyone else has already said, DON’T DO IT. It’s a bad idea.
 
Btone said:
no 5g and 4g is poor, part of the reason why ive fitted wireless into most of my sheds as 4g is so slow, so i don't think the "number of hops" as i would just show them the farm, as for them miss using it, they over in my house half the week anyway using it for "school projects" anyway, so if i can get good internet in their house is save me a fortune in food :) .
it more a speed/bandwidth thing, would a wireless link have enough ?
Click to expand...

That's quite coincidental, as the last time I did a setup like this is was on a farm for a colleague, they had three houses on the property which three separate families lived in them (all related) but they could only get a decent connection to the main property, hence the solution was to just share the connection like you would anywhere else with a distributed network across buildings. It worked fine, and they never had any issues with the ISP etc. I do think they went with a business contract as it was a working farm, so maybe there is more scope in the contract for those expectations.
 
For me the biggest question is whether I want to be the one getting grief whenever my brother's family have internet issues. The technical aspect is solved and no ISP is going to care that you're letting your brother next door use your connection.

If you want to split their traffic out which is probably sensible then put them inside an A&A L2TP tunnel which is registered and paid for by them, https://www.aa.net.uk/broadband/l2tp-service/
 
Last edited:
Don't do business with family is my advice. Get them to get Starlink for their primary internet, and if you still see the need to join the LANs then do that as a separate endeavor.
 
I remember years ago on here someone had their broadband installed at a neighbour and then used wireless to transmit it over, would that be an option? That way it will be a completely independent connection from OP's.

Took me a while to find the thread, unfortunately all the photos of the completed setup are now gone: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/500m-wireless-options.18689126/

Although I guess the hop thing will still apply in this case too.
 
Last edited:
WJA96 said:
All wireless systems are affected by atmospheric conditions. Even indoor things like WiFi are not completely immune. There is research to show WiFi performance is (a tiny, tiny bit) worse with high solar activity.
Click to expand...
Of course, but practically, I've never noticed it. I do remember streaming perfectly fine through a serious storm a few weeks ago. My point is I don't think folk in the UK need to worry about Starlink and weather. Maybe I much stronger tropical downpours it's more of an issue.
 
ChrisD. said:
TTL but I highly doubt a home ISP is looking for that.

It’s a moot point, it really shouldn’t be done for many reasons already posted.
Click to expand...

If the other house
WJA96 said:
I am vastly simplifying this, so don’t shoot me if I get my overall number of hops wrong!

Every time data passes from one device to another it needs to make sure it can get back to the originating source so it counts up every time. These are called hops. The current hop count is included in the packet header in the data you send and receive. And incremented when the data is passed on from your device.

If you have a mobile phone on a data plan there will only be one hop from your phone to the cell tower. If you tether your phone then you get an extra hop from the tethered device to the phone then to the cell tower. So your ISP knows you’ve tethered the device and it can block any traffic over 1 hop. They actually do this if you don’t have a ‘tethering’ contract.

If you have an ISP with a home broadband connection, then 99.9% of your traffic should be 2 hops - client to router, router to ISP. In reality that’s not correct (lots more hops because of how Ethernet works), but it illustrates the example correctly.

If you do what the OP is suggesting then you get a hop from the remote client to the remote router, then a hop to the point-to-point bridge, then a hop to the other end of the bridge, then a hop to the router and finally a hop to the ISP. You can easily set up firewall filters to look for excessive hops which indicates connection sharing. There are small wireless broadband operators in the UK that do exactly this to ensure their connections are not being abused.

@Avalon is absolutely correct that they’re unlikely to target anyone but this technique is real and works.
Click to expand...

TTL is in the IP header and is decreased each time a packet traverses a layer 3 hop (router) so that eventually it’s dropped if there’s a routing loop. If it was increased each time it passed a router then it would be doing the opposite of its intended purpose

You are correct that you can gather some insight based on TTL, for example if it’s lower than expected at the first hop you can see a device was in the path that decreased it. I’ve never looked into how they do it but it’s a potential way that mobile operators could detect tethering. TTL can easily be re written to hide that a router decreased it if desired which makes it a pretty basic detection mechanism

If the OP had another house hanging off his router with layer 2 stretched between them with the devices at the far side picking up DHCP leases and using his router as the default gateway then they’d just look like LAN clients in his own house, ignoring the negligible difference in latency between his router and the house 500 metres away

If he did it routed and double NAT’ed and didn’t alter the TTL then yes it could be visible but it’s not a guaranteed way to see somebody is doing something they shouldn’t be, I’m always setting up routers behind my own to test things for work and my ISP likely never notices

Either way I doubt they look for this despite it almost certainly being against the Ts and Cs

I realise this is now sorted and they are going with Starlink but some of your technical explanations are incorrect
 
Illusion said:
If the other house


TTL is in the IP header and is decreased each time a packet traverses a layer 3 hop (router) so that eventually it’s dropped if there’s a routing loop. If it was increased each time it passed a router then it would be doing the opposite of its intended purpose

You are correct that you can gather some insight based on TTL, for example if it’s lower than expected at the first hop you can see a device was in the path that decreased it. I’ve never looked into how they do it but it’s a potential way that mobile operators could detect tethering. TTL can easily be re written to hide that a router decreased it if desired which makes it a pretty basic detection mechanism

If the OP had another house hanging off his router with layer 2 stretched between them with the devices at the far side picking up DHCP leases and using his router as the default gateway then they’d just look like LAN clients in his own house, ignoring the negligible difference in latency between his router and the house 500 metres away

If he did it routed and double NAT’ed and didn’t alter the TTL then yes it could be visible but it’s not a guaranteed way to see somebody is doing something they shouldn’t be, I’m always setting up routers behind my own to test things for work and my ISP likely never notices

Either way I doubt they look for this despite it almost certainly being against the Ts and Cs

I realise this is now sorted and they are going with Starlink but some of your technical explanations are incorrect
Click to expand...

Thank you for the correction.
 
Btone said:
we live in the country side. I can get FTTP at my house, but my brother (who lives on a different road) can not.
his house is just under 500m away and we have a clear line of sight . a family of 3 (2 who like being on social media and 1 gamer) and a wife who works from home and he like to watch movies stream tv.
would he be better getting a starlink in for high speed internet or setup a wireless bridge and use my fiber ?
so that they can all use the internet together, with there current setup he can't stream if someone else is using the net, and even at that it not that great
Click to expand...

Wireless bridge and use FTTP.

You can use a long range wireless access point to join his network with yours. If you have line-of-sight then I think something like two TP-Link CPE710, will do the trick.
 
One thing to point out with Starlink, don't think you can use a VPN with it, IE set it to say a VPN in France when you're in the UK it will think the dish is in France and you lose connection instantly

Can't get mine to work as above.

Otherwise its been flawless in use, flat mounted to the van roof.
 
Last edited:
Was going to say, VPN works fine with Starlink, I was on a cruise in August who used Sarlink and I VPN'd back to home without any issue.
 
clv101 said:
I use VPNs all over the world through Starlink regularly, never had a problem.
Click to expand...
^^^Using the VPN as you're in one country with the VPN set to another country ?, as I lose connection instantly.
I am using the Gl.Inet router connected to the dish via POE. The Starlink router is not connected.

@ChrisD. Are you're using the VPN on the ship and telling the VPN you're in another place/country?

I'm on the Roam package when its enabled.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom