Cascading with Balance 20, Balance One Core

We have a requirement for internet service for up to 250 users in a remote location serviced only by qty(2) LTE carriers.
Carrier A on AVERAGE has 30% more bandwidth then carrier B but also has higher bandwidth fluctuations and jitter.
Carrier B has less fluctuation and is more stable but at less throughput

We have qty(12) LTE modems with LTE service. We have external antenna and good RF strength to tower.

Typically in other installations with 3 WANS we set the Balance to a Home IP of

WAN 1 Static IP:
LTE Modem Gateway @ 192.168…2.1 DMZ from Router to WAN1 Port

WAN 2 Static IP:
LTE Modem Gateway @ 192.168…3.1 DMZ from Router to WAN1 Port

WAN 3 Static IP:
LTE Modem Gateway @ 192.168…4.1 DMZ from Router to WAN1 Port
Below is my typical deployment of a Balance 02 with 3 LTE WANs:

This time we need to use Qty(12) LTE connections from GE ports on Qty(12) LTE routers.
There will be up to 127 concurrent users on a Ubiquiti Unifi Network with CLoud Key controller.


  1. No known peplink device allows Qty(12) GE WAN ports. From the Peplink website only 3 appliances have recommended users in the qty (127) range and only the BPL-210 can be configured with Qty(3) GE WAN ports.

  2. Can the LAN port of qty(3) Balance ONE (BPL-ONE) be cascaded into the WAN ports of a BPL-210? effectively connecting qty(3) Balance Ones (BPL-ONE) fully populated with 5 LTE/Model Connections each.

  3. Is the BPL-210 being discontinued?

General functionality:
** Is there a benefit to turn of DHCP on the LTE Modem/router and set a static IP to the WAN port of Balance?
*** Is there a benefit to “DMZ” the static IP port of hte LTE Modem/Router into the WAN port of the Balance?
**** When setting the Static IP on the LTE Modem/Router to the balance WAN port, what should be the DNS settings? I was instructed in the past to set the FIrst DNS setting to the LTE Modem/Router gateway itself and the alternate to google Is this a good practice or should both DNS be set to google and respectively.

Thank you and best regards.


Hi - welcome to the forum.
To clarify. Is this 250 users connected over UBNT wifi to a single core location where you want to provide the internet from? If so why? is it a topology thing? Is there no cellular coverage at their locations and you are bringing the connectivity back to a place where cellular coverage exists?

Balance 1350 has 13 GBE WAN Ports. Balance 2500 has 12 WANs

You could also consider the EPX that can support 18 LTE modems simultaneously.

Yes. but don’t do this. It is extraordinarily messy - and you need to take into account throughput at each level of concentration. Use a bigger Balance and connect either single modem or multi modem MAX units or use an EPX.

Peplink will confirm but I have not heard that it has.


There is no obvious benefit to using the DNS servers from the mobile network operators that I can think of. I would typically use google DNS or


Thank you for the prompt response, I didn’t see the “Enterprise” tab for the Balance 2500.

We are helping some military members with internet service. They are transient through our facility and do not have SIMS registered in this country. So we are trying to aggregate all the band width and distribute it with rules preventing peer to peer file sharing and throttle individual bandwidth to 1 Mbps; enough for limited communication.

The Balance 2500 has a very steep price, As this is a not for profit endeavor we would like to minimize costs and provide reasonable service.

We own a variety of equipment; Qty (1) Peplink Balance 380, qty (2) Balance 20, qty (2) Balance One Cores Qty (1) Pepwave HD4

We are trying to maximize available bandwidth with existing equipment; thus the request for advice in cascading.

We have qty (5) Unifi AC Pro access points with a max of 127 users of on 2.4. We will limit users to 127.

Thank you again for your concise and helpful responses.

Which country are you in?

The HD4 with 4 active sims connected to the Unifi will do a very good job of this I think. Get a Transit Duo cat 18 on primecare and plug it into the WAN of the HD4 and you’ll get a good chunk of bandwidth. I have only rarely seen fixed physical locations where more than 4 simultaneous connections make much of a difference. The CAT18 though with its broader frerquency support might just find some extra bandwidth in the area…

1 Like

Thank you again for the prompt response. That is a great idea.

Are you familiar with the captive portal? Thinking the best way to distribute service is to let them gain access with email authentication; but does the portal give them EMAIL access ? How can they check their email if they do not have access? Does the portal give them open access for a window to be able to check mail?

Thank you

Of course.

Yes a few mins of access to check email.

1 Like

Hi @chrisnia,

Yes you can use Captive Portal with Email authentication - the user can be forced to check their email and confirm acceptance. They can be given between 2 minutes and 5 minutes to check for their emails - configurable within the portal.

You can remove the “Require Activation” tick and they would not be asked to confirm receipt of the email.

I hope this helps.



Well answered and thank you. So the system grants them WIFI long enough to authenticate their email. Perfect. I assume InControl is free with purchase of a new unit for the duration of the original warranty period.

Best regards

Yes, InControl is “included” with the warranty - once this expires there is an option to either renew the warranty, or purchase an InControl only subscription - so this allows you to continue to use InControl to manage the device, but doesn’t provide any hardware replacement option.

I hope this helps,


1 Like