• Networking

  • Using 2 wifi connections to connect to the same network

Hello, I wasn't so sure what to put as subject, sorry if you didn't like it
Can I use 2 WiFi connections to connect to the same network, for example my laptops WiFi adapter and a USB WiFi adapter to connect to one wireless internet connection?

Thanks
yes you can, and you switch between them. I can't think of why this can be impossible.

except if you want them to work simultaneously, but why would you do that?
I want them to work simultaneously, why? Because I think there is very good chance that the connection will be faster and worth a try if it's possible.
I know that you can't join 2 different internet connections to make one faster, but I'm not sure about joining the same network using 2 different connections.

Thanks
There are some apps like http://www.connectify.me/switchboard/ that "join" multiple connections to make your Interent faster. Though I haven't actually tried or read anything about them. So I don't know if they are really effective or stable/reliable.
yea, I'm going to try it once I get the chance to. But the way it works is to manage the connections, it doesn't directly join the internet connections to make one faster.
riqmarmes wroteI want them to work simultaneously, why? Because I think there is very good chance that the connection will be faster and worth a try if it's possible.
I know that you can't join 2 different internet connections to make one faster, but I'm not sure about joining the same network using 2 different connections.

Thanks
As the guys mentioned yes you can connect to the same Wlan network using two Wlan adapters, but your computer will only route the data through 1 interface so its useless, but you can specify each interface's Metric or set a static route if you wish to use each interface for different streams, example one for the internet and the other for local file sharing but either way its pointless in a home environment.
Ziad87 wroteThere are some apps like http://www.connectify.me/switchboard/ that "join" multiple connections to make your Internet faster. Though I haven't actually tried or read anything about them. So I don't know if they are really effective or stable/reliable.
haven't tried this software myself but it simply load balances between two or more connections so you get a feeling that you have faster internet connection under certain conditions, example connecting to multiple servers, or downloading from different servers or from a server that supports multiple connections and maybe torrents.
riqmarmes wroteI want them to work simultaneously, why? Because I think there is very good chance that the connection will be faster and worth a try if it's possible.
I know that you can't join 2 different internet connections to make one faster, but I'm not sure about joining the same network using 2 different connections.

Thanks
The OS will use either one or the other, even f you are connected to both at the same time, so you will not see any benefits.

Using more then one connexion in parallel to improve your bandwidth is called multiplexing, and its a very complex topic.
most home users might benefit from load balancing (fail over )in case of bridging two connections but multiplexing or bandwidth aggregation requires more computing power and special software/hardware

remember two wifi = 2 IPs
rolf wroteThe OS will use either one or the other, even f you are connected to both at the same time, so you will not see any benefits.

Using more then one connexion in parallel to improve your bandwidth is called multiplexing, and its a very complex topic.
What you're saying is wrong, no multiplexing isn't using more then one connection in parallel to improve your bandwidth, it is a different topic and can't be applied on this case.

Multiplexing is used when you want to combine several connections over a SINGLE medium to a location where it is Demultiplexed to multiple connections(physical or logical) again and data is then sent to its respective destinations.
DNA wrote
rolf wroteThe OS will use either one or the other, even f you are connected to both at the same time, so you will not see any benefits.

Using more then one connexion in parallel to improve your bandwidth is called multiplexing, and its a very complex topic.
What you're saying is wrong, no multiplexing isn't using more then one connection in parallel to improve your bandwidth, it is a different topic and can't be applied on this case.

Multiplexing is used when you want to combine several connections over a SINGLE medium to a location where it is Demultiplexed to multiple connections(physical or logical) again and data is then sent to its respective destinations.

OK, thanks for the correction. It is true, that is the opposite of what I had in mind. The correct expression should have been Inverse Multiplexing, then.
Actually if you connect twice to the same network, it could make your connection to the internet (from your laptop) "faster" if your router is using some kind of throttling per IP (and if your OS does some kind of load balancing)...
But in the vast majority of cases (virtually always), the bottleneck would be the router's internet connection, not the connection between you and the router, and you would not see any difference. So what I said about not seing any benefits remains true, from a practical and realistic standpoint.
rolf wroteActually if you connect twice to the same network, it could make your connection "faster" if your router is using some kind of throttling per IP...
But in the vast majority of cases (virtually always), the bottleneck would be the router's internet connection, not the connection between you and the router, and you would not see any difference.
The connection is not a home network or a simple network, the speed might be limited by the connection. In which I'm kinda saying 2 connections = 2x the speed.
riqmarmes wrote
rolf wroteActually if you connect twice to the same network, it could make your connection "faster" if your router is using some kind of throttling per IP...
But in the vast majority of cases (virtually always), the bottleneck would be the router's internet connection, not the connection between you and the router, and you would not see any difference.
The connection is not a home network or a simple network, the speed might be limited by the connection. Which kinda implies 2 connections = 2x the speed.
Please define "the connection".
Connection between what and what? And what kind network would that be, then?
rolf wrote
DNA wrote
rolf wroteThe OS will use either one or the other, even f you are connected to both at the same time, so you will not see any benefits.

Using more then one connexion in parallel to improve your bandwidth is called multiplexing, and its a very complex topic.
What you're saying is wrong, no multiplexing isn't using more then one connection in parallel to improve your bandwidth, it is a different topic and can't be applied on this case.

Multiplexing is used when you want to combine several connections over a SINGLE medium to a location where it is Demultiplexed to multiple connections(physical or logical) again and data is then sent to its respective destinations.

OK, thanks for the correction. It is true, that is the opposite of what I had in mind. The correct expression should have been Inverse Multiplexing, then.
imux is true if the links are generated from a single physical medium .. the term you are looking for is link aggregation ( different physical medium , 2 NICs per example , that uses two links to reach the same point )
Sorry for not being clear, "the connection" refers to the network/router to my laptop connection. So if I connect to the router twice, I might get twice the speed.

And if the Dispatch application works as they claim, then it might do the trick.
Tarek wrote
rolf wrote
DNA wrote
What you're saying is wrong, no multiplexing isn't using more then one connection in parallel to improve your bandwidth, it is a different topic and can't be applied on this case.

Multiplexing is used when you want to combine several connections over a SINGLE medium to a location where it is Demultiplexed to multiple connections(physical or logical) again and data is then sent to its respective destinations.

OK, thanks for the correction. It is true, that is the opposite of what I had in mind. The correct expression should have been Inverse Multiplexing, then.
imux is true if the links are generated from a single physical medium .. the term you are looking for is link aggregation ( different physical medium , 2 NICs per example , that uses two links to reach the same point )
There doesn't seem to be any mention of the physical medium in the wikpedia article (that I linked), and I don't see why the concept would be bound to using the same physical medium, and think it would make less sense to have it this way...

But anyway you seem to be the specialist here, so you just might be right!
riqmarmes wroteSorry for not being clear, "the connection" refers to the network/router to my laptop connection. So if I connect to the router twice, I might get twice the speed.

And if the Dispatch application works as they claim, then it might do the trick.
No worries, I just want to be sure that it's clear, your wording was somewhat ambiguous, and thanks for clarifying.
Anyway, in that case, and if you know what you're doing (which seems to be the case), then what is there left to do but trying, if you find it to be worth the effort!
think about like this :
Mex : data from several origins from several mediums using the same line or link ( in the old days it was really a line , like a telephone line ) then divided by a demex to several points
Imex : one origin using several lines or links to a single point
link aggregation : several origins using several lines to a single point ( mostly used in wired networking for bonding or fail-over )

In the case of this post , he is using two wireless origins ( wireless nic and the wireless usb nic ) connected each by it's own radio signal to the router ( several origins with several links to a single point )
Tarek you made it more clear, a common example of multiplexing is Ogero's DSLAM, all the user routers are connected to ports on it then the DSLAM multiplexes all the data streams and send them through a Fiber optic cable to the main CO in which the main BRAS and gateway routers are located.
4 months later
I was searching on the internet for a solution to this issue. I found a simple solution without any external software. I will post it here for future reference. This solution is tested on windows 7 and ethernet + wifi (but should work on other combinations of 2 or more).

Set the interface metric of both interfaces to the exact same number. To access the interface metric:

1) Go to adapter settings in network and sharing center
2) Right click your first interface and properties
3) Click on internet protocol version 4 and press Properties
4) Click Advanced
5) Untick Automatic metric and enter any number in interface metric (tested with number 20)
6) Press ok, ok, and close
7) Do steps 2 till 6 for second interface using same number in step 5

Now your bandwidth should be the sum of the bandwidth of the 2 interfaces . As others mentioned here, if the server allows 1 connection, then you will get the speed of 1 interface only. I tested it on 2 1mbps connections and getting 210KB/s on steam.

Note: If this solution bugs out at the beginning and only 1 interface is working, then disconnect this interface until other interface starts working and recconect.

Note 2: Make sure to have different subnets (ex interface 1 in 192.168.1.x/24 and interface 2 in 192.168.0.x/24)


Edit: As mention by Tarek in the below post, the priority is dependent on sum of interface metric and route metric. I got lucky and had the same route metric. You can check the sum of both metrics using "print route" in command prompt. In the IPv4 Route table, your interface IP address should be listed. You can see the metric here (which is sum of interface metric and route metric). This value should be the same for both interfaces to not prioritize one over the other.

If you have different route metrics for whatever reason, you can modify them by following these steps.
1) Go through steps 1 till 3 above.
2) Apparently, changing route metrics doesn't work with DHCP so change your settings here to a static IP address.
3) Click advanced.
4) In the default gateway tab, click add.
5) Enter your default gateway, untick automatic metric and enter a metric here.
6) Ok and close.
7) Do the steps again for second interface using same metric in step 5.