4-WAN SpeedFusion faster as 2 pairs instead of 4 together?

vpn

#1

I’m doing some optimization to the outbound policies and so on at one of my sites. They are running a B1Core with a SF licence and an extra WAN licence. The other end of the SF tunnel is a FusionHub appliance. Through experimentation, we have discovered that the total downlink bandwidth available by bonding WAN1-2 and WAN3-4 separately through the “Multiple Tunnels” option is greater than bonding all 4 together. This is only observed when we use the built in load test for TCP packets, not UDP. I believe this likely has to do with the latency mismatch. 1-2 are more alike and 3-4 are more alike.

In the past, that remote site generally had all traffic routed via FusionHub over 4-WAN SpeedFusion. Is there a way to leverage our observation about the multiple tunnels without using outbound policy like this post describes? Something like a 1:1 (or 3:2 in my case actually) weighted balance between the two tunnels without having to pick a specific type of traffic?


#2

Hmmm :thinking::thinking::thinking:, This is more like fine tuning needed to be done for the SpeedFusion tunnel to get the most throughput base on the WAN characteristic. Please open a support ticket here support team to check.


#3

Dredging up an old topic here… With the release of FEC, user experience has seen a great speed improvement. I took this as an opportunity to test adding an LTE antenna into the mix with our B1Core router. What is strange is that 4-link ADSL without the LTE USB stick is faster than when I add it to the SF pool.

Is this normal behaviour?

Test data was an abnormally large database query routed over SF VPN.

Left is no LTE USB Modem. Right is with LTE USB Modem turned on.