Is there any router can handle multiple internet lines from different ISP?

[rtn66uftw]

I'm using 01 Asus RT-AC3100 and 02 RT-AC68U to handle 3 separated internet connections from 3 different ISPs atm. I'm looking for a router that can handle those 3 lines separately to reduce the footprint of my home network. I'll buy 03 UAP-AC-PRO APs to use with that said router. Just to be clear, I don't need to bond 3 connection together into one.

Any suggestion would be appreciated? TiA

 

[MichaelCG]

What are the use cases for three ISP connections? How are you wanting to use them? For sure a pfSense box can handle it...depending on how you want to actually utilize them.

 

[rtn66uftw]

What are the use cases for three ISP connections? How are you wanting to use them? For sure a pfSense box can handle it...depending on how you want to actually utilize them.

Thanks for the reply! I will use them as normal internet connection, nothing special. Just want to know if it's possible to use only 1 router for all three + 03 UAP-AC-PRO APs to save space and easier to manage

 

[MichaelCG]

Still not clear what your use case and expectations are. Trying to understand that to make sure any recommendation will actually do what you want it to do. Having a router that can handle take multiple WAN is the easy part. What you expect it to do with each connection is generally the more difficult part. Do you want load balancing? Static routing? Fail-over?

Depending on your answers, there are for sure commercial and open source solutions to make it work.

 

[System Error Message]

there are many routers that can make use of multiple lines, the question is the total speed.
pfsense wont have any issue speed wise as thats dependent on the CPU.
other non consumer routers can do it as well. both mikrotik and ubiquiti dont have specific WAN/LAN ports defined but its suggested to have the WANs on CPU connected ports but multiwan isnt easy to set up on them.

 

[rtn66uftw]

there are many routers that can make use of multiple lines, the question is the total speed.
pfsense wont have any issue speed wise as thats dependent on the CPU.
other non consumer routers can do it as well. both mikrotik and ubiquiti dont have specific WAN/LAN ports defined but its suggested to have the WANs on CPU connected ports but multiwan isnt easy to set up on them.

Still not clear what your use case and expectations are. Trying to understand that to make sure any recommendation will actually do what you want it to do. Having a router that can handle take multiple WAN is the easy part. What you expect it to do with each connection is generally the more difficult part. Do you want load balancing? Static routing? Fail-over?

Depending on your answers, there are for sure commercial and open source solutions to make it work.

Thank you guys! Sorry for not being clear.

I don't have any specific requirement rather than space saving and easy network management:
- 3 WANs provide 3 separated subnets into 3 APs
- These 3 lines should be independent at all time, no load-balancing, no fail-over. Websites and apps I'm using don't like requests coming from multiple IP addresses

 

[System Error Message]

well you will need a 6 port router at least, the question is how much bandwidth in total will the combined ISPs add up to? This matters to the choice of routers. If below 1Gb/s than switched ports can be considered for LAN which mikrotik has plenty of many port routers. For example the RB3011 has 2x5 switched ports, each switch port group has 2Gb/s to CPU and you can set whether or not a port will be switched despite being part of a switch but the router itself cannot handle 2Gb/s internet without acceleration. Ubiquti's ERPRO has 8 ports all CPU connected, this is ideal and it will handle up to 3Gb/s NAT with acceleration, 300Mb/s if you use QoS. If you dont mention your total speeds i cannot recommend a specific router. Even going x86 route you can get 2 intel server quad port NICs.

All these 3 options will handle any number of ISPs, its a question of throughput and the throughput of the features you want.

 

[rtn66uftw]

well you will need a 6 port router at least, the question is how much bandwidth in total will the combined ISPs add up to? This matters to the choice of routers. If below 1Gb/s than switched ports can be considered for LAN which mikrotik has plenty of many port routers. For example the RB3011 has 2x5 switched ports, each switch port group has 2Gb/s to CPU and you can set whether or not a port will be switched despite being part of a switch but the router itself cannot handle 2Gb/s internet without acceleration. Ubiquti's ERPRO has 8 ports all CPU connected, this is ideal and it will handle up to 3Gb/s NAT with acceleration, 300Mb/s if you use QoS. If you dont mention your total speeds i cannot recommend a specific router. Even going x86 route you can get 2 intel server quad port NICs.

All these 3 options will handle any number of ISPs, its a question of throughput and the throughput of the features you want.

Thank you very much! Each of the line I have is only 12 Mbps (it's sad I know :/). So what would be the best value option you would recommend to me? Is there any good 101 tutorial that you're aware of? After reconsidering, I might go with the UAP-AC-LR to save a little bit of money to put on the router

 

[MichaelCG]

3 WANs into 3 separated VLANs with no intermingling? That may prove to be a bit of a challenge if you want true isolation between them. What comes to my mind first is finding something that supports multiple routing tables....otherwise something that supports policy based routing may work as well. I don't think anything that is truly "simple" exists for how you are describing what you are after.

The 3 APs are the easy no brainer....you can use a single AP with either RADIUS or multiple SSIDs to drop the clients onto the proper VLAN. You don't even need 3 physical APs unless you are chasing speed and/or client density.

 

[rtn66uftw]

3 WANs into 3 separated VLANs with no intermingling? That may prove to be a bit of a challenge if you want true isolation between them. What comes to my mind first is finding something that supports multiple routing tables....otherwise something that supports policy based routing may work as well. I don't think anything that is truly "simple" exists for how you are describing what you are after.

The 3 APs are the easy no brainer....you can use a single AP with either RADIUS or multiple SSIDs to drop the clients onto the proper VLAN. You don't even need 3 physical APs unless you are chasing speed and/or client density.

Great! I didn't know that an AP can actually do that. I have about 80 devices over 3 connections (most of them on 3 separated 2.4GHz channel 1, 6 & 11 atm). Do you think either UAP-AC-LR or UAP-AC-PRO would be able to handle that? I've never owned an Ubiquiti AP/router before.

 

[System Error Message]

i would suggest the RB3011 and plugging the WANs into 1 switch group and LANs into another. Segmentation is easy in mikrotik and so is configuring the network/routing tables. You should know that regardless of any router, they will all select 1 WAN as the main WAN for use of router operations (like DNS). Make sure to unswitch any port first and you wont even need to set up vlans, only set your 3 LAN subnets, DHCP for each, firewall for each and you're set. You can also set up radius that way as well and an AP for multiple SSIDs. you can also use the Rb2011 too as long as it has 2 seperate switch chips or more CPU connected ports.

With mikrotik, just perform layer 1 segmentation (interface and switch management) and layer 3, you dont even need vlans but if you do use 1 AP with 1 cable you will need vlans. Sure there are cheaper routers that will do the job but i would not have LAN and WAN on the same switch even with vlans and layer 1 segmentation using the switch (meaning not switching the ports). The RB3011/2011 can be rackmounted as well and have passive cooling unlike the ERPRO. The RB3011 has a single POE out capable of powering a ubiquiti AP (you should check the voltage and watts match so that enough power can be supplied). Just remember that with POE you want the cables to be as short as possible. You will have lots of free CPU left on mikrotik to run scripts and other functionalities even dude server which is mikrotik's network monitoring. It also has SFP port so that means 1 modem less if a valid SFP module exists for your internet medium (ERPRO has 2 and is also a good consideration with CPU connected ports only, just costs more).

Im not sure which ubiquiti router can do it, probably all if its the same series, just read the description about radius.
So i would suggest either the
RB2011 (make sure it has gigabit ports and 2 switch groups or as many CPU connected ports as WANs at least and has 1 SFP, doesnt support dude server)
RB3011 (has POE out and 1 SFP)
ERPRO (has CPU connected ports only and 2 SFP)
pfsense based mini PC router (the best option if you use only 1 AP and vlans as long as it can perform NAT for 3 different networks, each with their own WAN)

Setting up internet is pretty easy. First set up the connection and make sure the router can connect to internet via all 3 lines, set up 3 vlan interfaces and attach to the ethernet interface, give each vlan interface its own LAN ip (basically it is the gateway IP for each LAN), set up NAT rule for each LAN with the syntax of from 192.168.1.0/24 to 0.0.0.0/0 action masquerade out interface WAN1 (you only need 3 of these rules). despite mikrotik routers with switch chips allow configuring switch chips, it is better to do it on the CPU instead as you can use those vlans in your config. With pfsense and ubiquiti you must select not to load balance to wans or have fail over or any sort of handling with it but you also will need to define 3 LANs as well. With mikrotik defining a network is pretty straight forward as giving an IP address to an interface as both ubiquiti and pfsense ask you a bunch of stuff when you add a network but load balancing and QoS are very difficult to set up on mikrotik but easier to set up on ubiquiti and pfsense.

If you plan on caching such as a transparent proxy cache, the ERPRO is capable of doing it at faster than your WAN speed but pfsense would be a better choice for it as you can attach a hard drive/SSD and use that for cache. Mikrotik can do it too but from my experience, mikrotik is the best router out of the 3 but has the worst software while pfsense has the best software and is a very good router too. ubiquiti is in the middle, its the worst out of the 3 as a router but better than mikrotik when it comes to software (its basically a MIPS based embedded linux machine that lets you install debian compatible packages compiled for MIPS).

 

[rtn66uftw]

i would suggest the RB3011 and plugging the WANs into 1 switch group and LANs into another. Segmentation is easy in mikrotik and so is configuring the network/routing tables. You should know that regardless of any router, they will all select 1 WAN as the main WAN for use of router operations (like DNS). Make sure to unswitch any port first and you wont even need to set up vlans, only set your 3 LAN subnets, DHCP for each, firewall for each and you're set. You can also set up radius that way as well and an AP for multiple SSIDs. you can also use the Rb2011 too as long as it has 2 seperate switch chips or more CPU connected ports.

With mikrotik, just perform layer 1 segmentation (interface and switch management) and layer 3, you dont even need vlans but if you do use 1 AP with 1 cable you will need vlans. Sure there are cheaper routers that will do the job but i would not have LAN and WAN on the same switch even with vlans and layer 1 segmentation using the switch (meaning not switching the ports). The RB3011/2011 can be rackmounted as well and have passive cooling unlike the ERPRO. The RB3011 has a single POE out capable of powering a ubiquiti AP (you should check the voltage and watts match so that enough power can be supplied). Just remember that with POE you want the cables to be as short as possible. You will have lots of free CPU left on mikrotik to run scripts and other functionalities even dude server which is mikrotik's network monitoring. It also has SFP port so that means 1 modem less if a valid SFP module exists for your internet medium (ERPRO has 2 and is also a good consideration with CPU connected ports only, just costs more).

Im not sure which ubiquiti router can do it, probably all if its the same series, just read the description about radius.
So i would suggest either the
RB2011 (make sure it has gigabit ports and 2 switch groups or as many CPU connected ports as WANs at least and has 1 SFP, doesnt support dude server)
RB3011 (has POE out and 1 SFP)
ERPRO (has CPU connected ports only and 2 SFP)
pfsense based mini PC router (the best option if you use only 1 AP and vlans as long as it can perform NAT for 3 different networks, each with their own WAN)

Setting up internet is pretty easy. First set up the connection and make sure the router can connect to internet via all 3 lines, set up 3 vlan interfaces and attach to the ethernet interface, give each vlan interface its own LAN ip (basically it is the gateway IP for each LAN), set up NAT rule for each LAN with the syntax of from 192.168.1.0/24 to 0.0.0.0/0 action masquerade out interface WAN1 (you only need 3 of these rules). despite mikrotik routers with switch chips allow configuring switch chips, it is better to do it on the CPU instead as you can use those vlans in your config. With pfsense and ubiquiti you must select not to load balance to wans or have fail over or any sort of handling with it but you also will need to define 3 LANs as well. With mikrotik defining a network is pretty straight forward as giving an IP address to an interface as both ubiquiti and pfsense ask you a bunch of stuff when you add a network but load balancing and QoS are very difficult to set up on mikrotik but easier to set up on ubiquiti and pfsense.

If you plan on caching such as a transparent proxy cache, the ERPRO is capable of doing it at faster than your WAN speed but pfsense would be a better choice for it as you can attach a hard drive/SSD and use that for cache. Mikrotik can do it too but from my experience, mikrotik is the best router out of the 3 but has the worst software while pfsense has the best software and is a very good router too. ubiquiti is in the middle, its the worst out of the 3 as a router but better than mikrotik when it comes to software (its basically a MIPS based embedded linux machine that lets you install debian compatible packages compiled for MIPS).

This is awesome! Thank you very much for spending time writing all this! It's a little bit over my head now and I will sure need a lot of time to digest all useful information in your post. Time for more research

 

[MichaelCG]

Great! I didn't know that an AP can actually do that. I have about 80 devices over 3 connections (most of them on 3 separated 2.4GHz channel 1, 6 & 11 atm). Do you think either UAP-AC-LR or UAP-AC-PRO would be able to handle that? I've never owned an Ubiquiti AP/router before.

80 clients on a single AP may be pushing it depending on the performance requirements of the clients...as well as what the spread happens to be since you will be adding in 5GHz as well. The Ubiquiti APs are overall fairly decent performers at a reasonable price point. For any of us to narrow down your LITE vs LR vs PRO discussion, we need to know more about the types of clients, expected performance, and other details. "Generally" unless you know you need the 3x3 5GHz radio in the PRO or will have high client density, you can usually stick to the LITE or the LR models. I am running two LR at my house for about 20'ish WiFi clients. I only "needed" one, but I wanted a 2nd one to toy with. The LR is supposed to be better at servicing mobile clients at distance better than the others.

 

[sfx2000]

pfsense based mini PC router (the best option if you use only 1 AP and vlans as long as it can perform NAT for 3 different networks, each with their own WAN)

pfSense on their SG-2440 could definitely manage three WAN side connections, and that's that.

(2440 has four interfaces - so put three on the WAN, one on the LAN, and drop that into a switch)

But reading through this thread - one has to take stock of what the needs/wants are, client load, and then sort out a solution.

This is a good case study on perhaps ad-hoc growth over time, and we end up in a very unbalanced situation...

Three WAN connections is probably overkill - better to cut this down to 2 providers, might save some money there, and get better service to boot.

And folks do tend to overthink their needs - the real question to ask is what is the need at any given end-point...

And then build the solution from there.

 

[rtn66uftw]

pfSense on their SG-2440 could definitely manage three WAN side connections, and that's that.

(2440 has four interfaces - so put three on the WAN, one on the LAN, and drop that into a switch)

But reading through this thread - one has to take stock of what the needs/wants are, client load, and then sort out a solution.

This is a good case study on perhaps ad-hoc growth over time, and we end up in a very unbalanced situation...

Three WAN connections is probably overkill - better to cut this down to 2 providers, might save some money there, and get better service to boot.

And folks do tend to overthink their needs - the real question to ask is what is the need at any given end-point...

And then build the solution from there.

80 clients on a single AP may be pushing it depending on the performance requirements of the clients...as well as what the spread happens to be since you will be adding in 5GHz as well. The Ubiquiti APs are overall fairly decent performers at a reasonable price point. For any of us to narrow down your LITE vs LR vs PRO discussion, we need to know more about the types of clients, expected performance, and other details. "Generally" unless you know you need the 3x3 5GHz radio in the PRO or will have high client density, you can usually stick to the LITE or the LR models. I am running two LR at my house for about 20'ish WiFi clients. I only "needed" one, but I wanted a 2nd one to toy with. The LR is supposed to be better at servicing mobile clients at distance better than the others.

Thanks guys! There is only limited number of ISPs in my area and 12 Mbps is the highest I can get from them. It's not cheap either, $44.99/month/line. The only good thing is that there is no data cap. Of the 80 devices I have, about 60 of them constantly stream video 24/7 (phones and tablets). I'm averaging about 150-180 GB/day data usage across 3 lines. So maybe 1 AP won't cut it but I will give it a test first then add the 2nd or 3rd if needed.

 

[System Error Message]

ah i thought you wanted to distribute internet to others.
If its because you need the bandwidth get yourself pfsense, its the easiest to set up load balancing so you can combine all 3 ISPs. If all ISPs are the same speed you can actually get yourself a bonded internet service where either the ISP or some provider at the datacenter provides internet over your 3 lines. Basically this is a bit like VPN but your data gets split into 3 and goes across all 3 lines equally effectively giving you 36Mb/s but with higher latency.

 

[Mokers]

Is your only goal to balance the load among the three devices? Is there any need to keep the devices on each AP separate from each other?

 

[rtn66uftw]

ah i thought you wanted to distribute internet to others.
If its because you need the bandwidth get yourself pfsense, its the easiest to set up load balancing so you can combine all 3 ISPs. If all ISPs are the same speed you can actually get yourself a bonded internet service where either the ISP or some provider at the datacenter provides internet over your 3 lines. Basically this is a bit like VPN but your data gets split into 3 and goes across all 3 lines equally effectively giving you 36Mb/s but with higher latency.

Is your only goal to balance the load among the three devices? Is there any need to keep the devices on each AP separate from each other?

Combining 3 lines would be ideal for most people but my case is different. I want 3 lines to be independent at all time, no load-balancing, no fail-over. If 1 line has problem, is down or slow, do nothing. Websites and apps I'm using don't like requests coming from multiple IP addresses.

 

[System Error Message]

Combining 3 lines would be ideal for most people but my case is different. I want 3 lines to be independent at all time, no load-balancing, no fail-over. If 1 line has problem, is down or slow, do nothing. Websites and apps I'm using don't like requests coming from multiple IP addresses.

and thats what bonding is for, 3 seperate lines and at the other end is an ISP that combines all 3 over your ISP. 1 ip address but you get 3x the speed.

Still its your decision whether you want independent, balanced+fail over, bonded. All my suggestions will work.

 

[sfx2000]

and thats what bonding is for, 3 seperate lines and at the other end is an ISP that combines all 3 over your ISP. 1 ip address but you get 3x the speed.

Still its your decision whether you want independent, balanced+fail over, bonded. All my suggestions will work.

From what I've experience - bonding only works from a single provider, as this is generally layer 2, and the Layer 3 needs to be coupled end to end across the bonds.

With 2-3 wan's - load balancing and failover is a generally a good approach for high availability services - there, CARP has some options in pfSense...

https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Configuring_pfSense_Hardware_Redundancy_(CARP)

(uTik has similar options here, as do other Router OS's)

Websites and apps I'm using don't like requests coming from multiple IP addresses.

They won't - this is how the internet, and more importantly, even layer 2 works... you'll be fine..

Which goes back to my original statement in this thread - one doesn't really need three connections in the first place - but in an HA environment, two is enough if they're from different sources.