I have a GL.iNet travel router. When I am not travel, it connects to the router's second WAN port. If my main internet goes down, it takes me 30 seconds to tether my phone and failover manually. My carrier detects and throttles hotspot traffic by measuring packets TTL, so I tweaks the router's iptables to dodge that. Typically I get over 400 Mbps.
From time to time I get the itch to improve my home network uptime, and I have to keep reminding myself that the current setup is fine.
I have a friend that is also curious. Their fibre cable was cut by addicts trying to find a source of copper that took a few days to be repaired. Using their hot spot during the outage used up their allotted hot spot bandwidth for the month. My friend would be very interested in how to avoid potential down time in the future.
Might I suggest an email address added to your HN profile, lest a publicly posted reply result in observation by a nefarious telecom employee who just might obviate the proposed solution to your friend’s conundrum.
(Tangential, regarding GL.Net routers: I find it satisfying that these routers run OpenWRT out of the box, and top the "Travel routers" category on Amazon: "Overall Pick" and "Amazon's Choice".)
I run several GL.Net routers in a mesh across two continents, some have Starlink and cellular, some on regular ol' fiber. They are bulletproof, highly recommend.
The use case varies but for what it’s worth, most major cellular provider in the US offer fallback Internet plans. Ranges from 10-20 a month depending if you already have a line with them. AT&T has an interesting one where your phone lines hotspot is free and unthrottled whenever your fiber is impacted.
I also do this. Xfinity went out for a few hours earlier this month and Unifi failed over almost instantly, and within minutes we had high speed internet once I upgraded us. The standby mode would have been plenty for basic web browsing, too.
$5/mo for pretty guaranteed connectivity, plus being able to take it around with me on travels is pretty awesome.
I was paying for gigabit with the local ISP and it slowed down and lost connection so frequently I bought a Starlink (the regular one, not the mini) as a "backup."
As per the usual, my internet went down and I switched to the backup Starlink. After working with it for about a week I cancelled my ISP.
Turned out around 350MBPS down was fine for everything I was doing (and it's way more reliable).
Kinda drifting off topic, but I'm so bitter over this
My girlfriend had been paying for 1Gb fiber for about 5 years at the insistence of the rep because "You stream 4k content and use your internet for work". $110/mo or something. Verizon comes by and sets her up with a modem and an "auto-route smart 2.4GHz/5GHz" router which slots you into a frequency based on...something. Who knows because it didn't work. It just put everything on 2.4GHz.
I noticed while at her house that the internet was painfully slow downloading large files and dug into it.
For those who don't know, 2.4GHz will typically top out around 100Mbps. Around the house you're looking at closer to 50Mbps. With 5Ghz it's much better, about 500Mbps typical, but verizons awful "smart" router just put everything on 2.4GHz.
So for years she had been paying for 1Gbps, Verizon happily taking her money, while she never saw over 100Mbps. It's also not like they tell you anywhere that the router they give you will only realistically offer 1/10th your Gb speed. Such a dumpster tier company. I can only imagine there are tens of thousands being conned by this scheme.
Anyway, I put in a new router and switched to the cheapest plan. The internet is now much faster.
I hate that it works so well these days. I have my antenna right out ground level between the house and trees. Absolute worst case scenario, and it's been rock solid in everything but the heaviest of rain storms for almost a year now. Still, the occasional slowdown or half-second outage really screws up Android's idiotic magic for switching between wifi and cell to the point that my pixel phone is basically useless at home. But that's more of a "google knows best" problem.
While the GUI and other polish certainly makes it more approachable then many I wouldn't really call it "consumer-grade", it's definitely into prosumer/SMB territory. And in that market there are thankfully a number of solid competitors fwiw, both directly the exact same head to head niche (Omada), more disjoint but sometimes higher value deals like Mikrotik, and open source solutions focused on embedded (like OpenWRT) or ones like OPNsense that will run on a vast array of PC hardware. Failover should be pretty straight forward on all of them, whatever is being used for routing just needs at least three network ports (2 or more for WAN, 1 or more for LAN).
A mobile failover would be cheaper and would give you better connectivity in heavy rain.
A 4G dongle can be purchased for $15, rather than $200 for a Starlink Mini. Then, let's say your main internet source fails and you need to actually use the backup plan beyond the standby amount of 0.5 Mbps. That will cost you a minimum of $50 for Starlink, versus roughly $25 for a month of unlimited cell service. As for standby costs, you can find phone plans for $5 per month tat give a small amount of fast data, as opposed to Starlink's unlimited amount of slow data.
But of course this only works for areas that actually have cell service.
If you're in a rural area (and heck, even in an urban era) the primary ISP of a region dropping is likely to cause a lot of congestion from cellphones falling back to the operator network.
I found it quite absurd that Spectrum (my cable operator) wants to sell me a modem with integrated 5G/4G backup knowing that as soon as the cable plant drops, hundreds of local phones are going to congest the network as well and my "Invincible WiFi(tm)" will end up dead as a dodo.
I'll just throw a Peplink up and throw the cable and Starlink into it and run that as my load balancer.
I was looking at the Standby plan a few months ago. There was some talk as to needing to activate it to full speed and price at least once per year or pay an extra fee which makes it a lot less attractive.
We've used this in San Francisco to great effect. Once the Internet went down and I took our portable battery to the roof with the Mini and my wife was only a few minutes on her phone hotspot before she was able to have meetings normally. Great functionality.
There are probably cheaper options, especially if you want to literally use your smartphone as the hotspot, but the Verizon home backup internet plan I looked at recently is $20 a month (and gives you 7 24-hour periods per month of unlimited data).
The Verizon home router is included when you sign up (you have to return it if you cancel). I bought it out of desperation when my home fiber internet was down all weekend due to a local tech screwing up and unplugging my house from the breakout box on the curb, but given the cost and the normal reliability of my home internet it’s really barely worth it.
Again this is location specific. I have a mini ups on my router/ont. And I assume that my provider also has a UPS, because even when power is out my landline connection just works.
Yup, OP is from the UK. In the UK I got a ThreeUK business SIM for £49 that lasted 2 years with 500GB data. It sits in wan failover and manages about 50mbps which is perfect to keep most services running.
Very much location dependent though. I lived less than a mile from Southampton city centre for a while and could never get anything close to dial-up standard download/upload speeds.
I've heard similar from London residents.
Everything is indirectly tied to musk. A well balanced portfolio has exposure to virtually everything on this planet. You buy nappies, you’re indirectly financing Musk. You post “i really want this” on hn, you’re indirectly financing Musk.
> If you realize how bad the people are, you can do something about it.
The problem is you have no idea what people are invested in what companies. How do you know that when you shop at $friendlySustainableCompany that people like Musk do not have shares there?
I can only be responsible for what I'm aware of, or can reasonably be expected to be aware of.
I, too, have a Starlink account for emergency backup service that I plan to switch over to Amazon LEO as soon as it's available. Lesser-evil principle at work again. Yes, there are things that aren't great about Amazon, but Amazon's practices are largely in sync with my capitalist values.
Musk's businesses are also compatible with my capitalist values, but those values don't include his special additional bonus values of Nazi-adjacent behavior, association with known pedophiles, sabotaging the government, or active subversion of elections. It's not a religious thing, it's just that given a choice, I'd rather support someone else.
> Modern journalism goes for clicks, which means generating outrage.
Is this about journalists talking about musk, or about musk himself? I mostly learn about his views through his own tweets that twitter always makes sure to serve me in my home page, and "goes for clicks"/"generating outrage" seems to fit well how musk uses his platform. In any case, his politics seem awful to me even without any journalistic mediation of them.
Sure, and anyone who thinks that was a Nazi salute fell victim to clickbait.
"My heart goes out to you" with a throwing gesture that ends with your arm outstretched. Of course, only the final position was blasted all over the press.
> Sure, and anyone who thinks that was a Nazi salute fell victim to clickbait.
You need to be terribly naive to ignore the fact that the guy known for supporting a swath of fascist and far-right groups, to the point the guy even hosts their events, wasn't casually throwing around Nazi salutes.
Did you see what DOGE did to the government? In particular to USAID? Estimates are that this has already killed hundreds of thousands of people who relied on that aid.
The issue isn't just Musk's politics. It's that his actions have been evil, the kind of negative impact that major wars have.
We're talking something like 1 million dead people per year with a quarter of those being children. For a level of assistance that cost the US nothing (0.43% of federal spending). This is an evil that in a few years puts you on the list of biggest mass murderers in history.
What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance? Or Monsanto, or Shell, or any corporation both of us rely on and support, in return for being able to eat, fuel our car, etc.
Is it because Musk isn't lobbying behind the corporation but doing it publically?
I truly don't understand where ya'll draw the line.
I truly don't care what other people do or want, I just look to ensure I can live the life I desire while respecting that which others want or impose.
As if me being angry or boycotting them will change their hearts. If it changes anything it's their tactics (more deception).
Another example is AI. I despise it, and honestly think it's evil. Yet I'm using it to secure financial stability in a way that does not require AI to sustain.
So when AI takes over my programming job I have the alternative already running, thanks to AI.
Don't reject the massive advantages of Starlink because of a man, just as you're not actively starving yourself despite our food supply being basically poison, caused by boards of men.
This passionate apologia of nihilism is not consistent with not caring what other people do or want. If "virtue signalling" elicits such reaction, perhaps it's actually working. Besides, voting with your wallet, an actual tangible action, is not virtue signalling.
If you ever visit Bonaire let me know and I can show you the abundance of life we are stewarding on my land.
It's mostly setting healthy boundaries on what we perceive we can affect. I don't buy American food (except Cocoa Rice Crispies), functionally it's a boycott. Is that the reasoning? No, it just tastes like crap.
Choosing to stand up for your principles in one instance, doesn't mean you suddenly have to fight all the battles all at once, even those that aren't apparent you (yet). How do you know this person is not choosing principles on other occasions already? IMO doing this is better than doing nothing. You can always choose to pick up more battles later. Other people can fight the other fights. Everyone always choosing self over principles will be worse in the long run
Elon Musk is far from the nicest person in the world and there are many fair reasons to dislike him but he wasn't in "the Epstein list" (whatever that is), he was pictured with a number of other tech CEOs at a dinner with Epstein, who was a wealthy financier.
I stumbled on a long article post by John Conrad @johnkonrad about War on Rocks on X that explains this mentality. I haven't seen it put this way before.
What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance? Or Monsanto, or Shell, or any corporation both of us rely on and support, in return for being able to eat, fuel our car, etc. Is it because Musk isn't lobbying behind the corporation but doing it publically?
And then citizens get to vote on what they perceive as important.
If you can show me the list of people you boycotted due to open support for left-wing parties we can talk.
Or do we only attempt to silence those that have standpoints we don't agree with?
Let me know, I'm new to this silencing of opinion thing but I notice it's what society will democratically choose for given the loud voices in that direction.
You have a service you want, but subscribing to it is a clear and direct way to financially support the advancement of fascist, extremist political groups and regimes pushing alarmingly racist and xenophobic policies not only in the US but also across the world.
Does your convenience justify a totalitarian shift? I don't think so. Do you think it does?
Wisdom is preparing for the shift using any legal means neccesary.
Morals are a mostly internal issue anyway, not based on solely external actions. You know the whole stealing bread to feed hungry children idea.
What you are doing we teach our kids to be virtue signaling.
Nobody is saying or at least I am not assuming you support Musk if you have Starlink. I simply think you have need for sattelite internet.
Just like I don't automatically assume your reason for eating meat (if you do) is to show your approval for modern slaughtering practices. Or if you wear clothing... does that mean you support exploitative labour?
Also FYI nobody really cares about American policies outside the US. We're mostly busy insulating ourselves from the effects we're perceiving.
More European food cause your food is now weird, more Chinese stuff since you don't manufacture much anymore, less media content cause they all want to teach our kids about more genders we know about.
But we do love Starlink! Fastest internet we ever had here.
The totalitarian shift is coming from the attempt at being totalitarian.
Why did Musk buy Twitter?
Do you remember how totalitarian-like Twitter was controlled?
Or do you wish me to forget since it was for the left?
The totalitarian shift is coming from people like you who feel like you have a total control on what is true and right. And from that standpoint you then declare others to be racist and xenophobic without attempting to truly understand their reasoning.
Not to mention the ever-increasing lack of tolerance for religion based views. Is it not your consitution that says that all men are born free, and are free to vote based on their OWN conciousness?
Yet they are labeled right-wingers and publically shamed and marginalized when possible. Even when all they want are federal repeals so each state can decide.
Do you not see that you guys have become the totalitarian ones? Wanting to impose how to view even life itself on others.
I prefer having a 2nd wired connection as my backup. The satellite connection has some clear benefits, but it's still going to outer space. A DOCSIS failover won't suffer from rain fade or a something landing on the antenna.
If I've got a situation so bad it takes out both of my connections I've probably got bigger things to deal with than internet access.
The buried fiber getting cut by is really the only thing that kills the connection. Fiber can go for a long time without power from the local grid infrastructure. My cable provider has a mostly orthogonal failure mode (goes down like clockwork with the grid).
I have a second fiber connection and found out recently that both fibers come along the same route and when a fire took out a utility pole, I lost both connections.
I then found out that all providers bar one (there are 5 or 6) come along the same street.
So if you are going to go with this option choose carefully your providers!
It honestly has to be very strong rain for it to create connection issues. I dont know where you live but here in germany we have that maybe once or twice a year with our antenna.
I live pretty rural and starlink has been worth the price over the last few years. When you compare it to dialup or hughesnet or viasat, it just works.
> Set IPv6 Connection to SLAAC (this is critical - SLAAC must be used, not DHCPv6) [...] Set 'Prefix Delegation Size' to 56
Is this also A UniFi bug, is Starlink doing IPv6 address assignment in a weird way, or is this a normal/RFC-compliant way of assigning a /56 subnet to a router?
I always assumed routeable prefixes on v6 require DHCPv6 (except for hacks like RFC 7278 and /64 subnets)?
Man, that 500kbit/s is quite generous for that price, can easily be used to access CCTV cameras in remote areas. I currently use LTE for that and it's 10 eur for 15GB data cap per month for that use case
Whatever one might think about Elon Musk's posts on X, the engineering and achievements coming out of SpaceX are genuinely extraordinary and deserve a lot of respect.
Every so often I do the numbers on a backup Internet connection and decide that it's not worth it, but understand that it is useful for peace of mind reasons. My Internet is just too reliable. When I'm out of contract with my current provider I'll need to reconsider this as the supplier I'm likely to move to has no obvious/simple/integrated backup option.
tl;dr FTTP. A single outage event in 16 months, lasted 40 minutes, whilst asleep.
I'm in the UK and have FTTP through BT. Way back when I also purchased the 4G backup option (Hybrid Connect) that comes with this service. That's an extra £7.50/mo when taken as part of the usual 24-month contract. It's simple to setup and doesn't require any specific maintenance.
Looking back at the logs it's clear (from an actual usage perspective) it's not been worth the £7.50/mo I've been paying for it, but I'll admit it helped give me peace of mind when I was on-call for work so it is easy to justify.
The BT supplied router (which is required if you want to use their 4G backup hardware) keeps a log of "Resilience events".
In the 16 months I've had FTTP it has had exactly one "resilience event". A 40m11s outage that started at 00:20:05 on 28/11/2025. I was unaware of this outage as I was asleep.
It was really useful when I moved house though. I was in the middle of a 24-month contract with BT at my old address so I ported my contract to my new address. This meant they had to come round and install FTTP at the new property, which they couldn't do for a couple of weeks, so I was without home Internet for these two weeks.
Luckily the 4G "Hybrid Connect" backup device wasn't geo-locked (or if it was maybe BT overlooked it given there was an outstanding "Moving house" order on the account) and so it worked perfectly for the ~2 weeks between moving in and FTTP being installed. If this hadn't worked then a temporary 4G router would have worked just as well.
I had a bunch of "resilience events" for this period (it wasn't one continuous event as I was moving/restarting the broadband router for various reasons). During those 13 days the logs show 163GB download and 25GB upload. That's an average of ~150KBps (note the capital B there, in bits-per-second it is ~1.1Mbps) download.
In the 26 months prior to moving (where I was on ~75Mbps FTTC with BT) I had 3 "resilience events". 17m36s, 47m7s, 31m22s. All between midnight and 4am where I wouldn't have noticed, these were also within 1 month of each other, the other 25 months had no problems at all. None.
When my current contract comes to an end I'll move to a different supplier (probably Community Fibre as I can get symmetric 5Gbps for less than I'm paying BT for 1Gbps/120Mbps) and then not worry about a backup. If it is less reliable then I'll look for a solution then.
My current backup is simply to hotspot on my mobile with 5G (good signal here). Doesn't help the others in the house but they can fend for themselves. Neighbours have different suppliers or technologies (DOCSIS vs FTTP) so swapping wifi details would also be an option.
As others have pointed out, a local power-cut that takes out of the FTTP cabinet could easily take out the local 4G/5G masts making a 4G backup solution useless. If this happens I can just take my laptop to a nearby cafe or the co-working space I use. That kind of outage is very rare though round here.
Then again with the sums involved (under £10/month extra) it may just be easier (for peace of mind again) to just plump for something that doesn't really make amazing financial sense as it's just the cost of a pint or two a month.
I have a GL.iNet travel router. When I am not travel, it connects to the router's second WAN port. If my main internet goes down, it takes me 30 seconds to tether my phone and failover manually. My carrier detects and throttles hotspot traffic by measuring packets TTL, so I tweaks the router's iptables to dodge that. Typically I get over 400 Mbps.
From time to time I get the itch to improve my home network uptime, and I have to keep reminding myself that the current setup is fine.
> My carrier detects and throttles hotspot traffic by measuring packets TTL, so I tweaks the router's iptables to dodge that.
Could you elaborate on this?
Some mobile phone providers check the packet TTL to limit tethering.
Network packets commonly have start with default TTL values of 64, 128, or 255. Each hop in the network subtracts 1.
When phone connects direct to carrier (cell tower, I assume) the carrier will see TTL of 64.
A laptop tethered to a phone introduces a hop so laptop-to-phone TTL is 64, phone-to-carrier TTL is 63.
Carriers can then limit bandwidth if network packet that don't have a common TTL.
For `iptables` look at `--ttl-inc 1` (to add back the 1 so 63 => 64) or `--ttl-set 64`.
Alternatively, you set the tethered devices to use a TTL of 65, e.g. linux/mac `sysctl -w net.inet.ip.ttl=65`
I have a friend that is also curious. Their fibre cable was cut by addicts trying to find a source of copper that took a few days to be repaired. Using their hot spot during the outage used up their allotted hot spot bandwidth for the month. My friend would be very interested in how to avoid potential down time in the future.
Might I suggest an email address added to your HN profile, lest a publicly posted reply result in observation by a nefarious telecom employee who just might obviate the proposed solution to your friend’s conundrum.
TTL++l0l
Sure, it's widely known.
Default TTL is usually 64.
Phone traffic TTL is 64.
But when behind the phone-as-router/gateway, compy traffic TTL is...63!
(Tangential, regarding GL.Net routers: I find it satisfying that these routers run OpenWRT out of the box, and top the "Travel routers" category on Amazon: "Overall Pick" and "Amazon's Choice".)
I run several GL.Net routers in a mesh across two continents, some have Starlink and cellular, some on regular ol' fiber. They are bulletproof, highly recommend.
Is your phone connected to the router through a cable or wirelessly?
They can do both - cable or bluetooth. Don't think wifi
The use case varies but for what it’s worth, most major cellular provider in the US offer fallback Internet plans. Ranges from 10-20 a month depending if you already have a line with them. AT&T has an interesting one where your phone lines hotspot is free and unthrottled whenever your fiber is impacted.
I also do this. Xfinity went out for a few hours earlier this month and Unifi failed over almost instantly, and within minutes we had high speed internet once I upgraded us. The standby mode would have been plenty for basic web browsing, too.
$5/mo for pretty guaranteed connectivity, plus being able to take it around with me on travels is pretty awesome.
I was paying for gigabit with the local ISP and it slowed down and lost connection so frequently I bought a Starlink (the regular one, not the mini) as a "backup."
As per the usual, my internet went down and I switched to the backup Starlink. After working with it for about a week I cancelled my ISP.
Turned out around 350MBPS down was fine for everything I was doing (and it's way more reliable).
Kinda drifting off topic, but I'm so bitter over this
My girlfriend had been paying for 1Gb fiber for about 5 years at the insistence of the rep because "You stream 4k content and use your internet for work". $110/mo or something. Verizon comes by and sets her up with a modem and an "auto-route smart 2.4GHz/5GHz" router which slots you into a frequency based on...something. Who knows because it didn't work. It just put everything on 2.4GHz.
I noticed while at her house that the internet was painfully slow downloading large files and dug into it.
For those who don't know, 2.4GHz will typically top out around 100Mbps. Around the house you're looking at closer to 50Mbps. With 5Ghz it's much better, about 500Mbps typical, but verizons awful "smart" router just put everything on 2.4GHz.
So for years she had been paying for 1Gbps, Verizon happily taking her money, while she never saw over 100Mbps. It's also not like they tell you anywhere that the router they give you will only realistically offer 1/10th your Gb speed. Such a dumpster tier company. I can only imagine there are tens of thousands being conned by this scheme.
Anyway, I put in a new router and switched to the cheapest plan. The internet is now much faster.
I hate that it works so well these days. I have my antenna right out ground level between the house and trees. Absolute worst case scenario, and it's been rock solid in everything but the heaviest of rain storms for almost a year now. Still, the occasional slowdown or half-second outage really screws up Android's idiotic magic for switching between wifi and cell to the point that my pixel phone is basically useless at home. But that's more of a "google knows best" problem.
What is the role of Unifi here? I read the article and went to their site but I still have no clue.
Unifi is one of the few consumer-grade routers that supports dual WAN.
While the GUI and other polish certainly makes it more approachable then many I wouldn't really call it "consumer-grade", it's definitely into prosumer/SMB territory. And in that market there are thankfully a number of solid competitors fwiw, both directly the exact same head to head niche (Omada), more disjoint but sometimes higher value deals like Mikrotik, and open source solutions focused on embedded (like OpenWRT) or ones like OPNsense that will run on a vast array of PC hardware. Failover should be pretty straight forward on all of them, whatever is being used for routing just needs at least three network ports (2 or more for WAN, 1 or more for LAN).
Most likely to be a router, configured to fail over.
A mobile failover would be cheaper and would give you better connectivity in heavy rain.
A 4G dongle can be purchased for $15, rather than $200 for a Starlink Mini. Then, let's say your main internet source fails and you need to actually use the backup plan beyond the standby amount of 0.5 Mbps. That will cost you a minimum of $50 for Starlink, versus roughly $25 for a month of unlimited cell service. As for standby costs, you can find phone plans for $5 per month tat give a small amount of fast data, as opposed to Starlink's unlimited amount of slow data.
But of course this only works for areas that actually have cell service.
I live a 25 minute train ride from london in a town with about 16000 residents, on a busy street 5 minutes walk from the main station.
My cell is unusable.
TFA specifically calls out not wanting to depend on 4G/5G coverage, which is anything but ubiquitous:
> It has the advantage of working pretty much anywhere with a view of the sky so no relying on mobile network coverage.
I'm also not sure if $25/month is anything close to the global average for unlimited 4G/5G data (if even available).
Sounds way too high to me, I am paying €8.80/month for unlimited 5G, calls and texting
I think it’s uncontroversial that cheap, unlimited 5G exists in some places.
If you're in a rural area (and heck, even in an urban era) the primary ISP of a region dropping is likely to cause a lot of congestion from cellphones falling back to the operator network.
I found it quite absurd that Spectrum (my cable operator) wants to sell me a modem with integrated 5G/4G backup knowing that as soon as the cable plant drops, hundreds of local phones are going to congest the network as well and my "Invincible WiFi(tm)" will end up dead as a dodo.
I'll just throw a Peplink up and throw the cable and Starlink into it and run that as my load balancer.
I was looking at the Standby plan a few months ago. There was some talk as to needing to activate it to full speed and price at least once per year or pay an extra fee which makes it a lot less attractive.
We've used this in San Francisco to great effect. Once the Internet went down and I took our portable battery to the roof with the Mini and my wife was only a few minutes on her phone hotspot before she was able to have meetings normally. Great functionality.
Using a 4g/5g router is much easier and probably cheaper/power efficient.
Depending on your area you don't even need an external one. A simple 4g dongle would do.
There are probably cheaper options, especially if you want to literally use your smartphone as the hotspot, but the Verizon home backup internet plan I looked at recently is $20 a month (and gives you 7 24-hour periods per month of unlimited data).
The Verizon home router is included when you sign up (you have to return it if you cancel). I bought it out of desperation when my home fiber internet was down all weekend due to a local tech screwing up and unplugging my house from the breakout box on the curb, but given the cost and the normal reliability of my home internet it’s really barely worth it.
Unifi (which the OP uses) even has dedicated devices for this type of failover: https://help.ui.com/hc/en-us/articles/29887153953559-UniFi-5...
Spendy though.
The Unifi 5G modem for the UK [1] is £378 (~USD500) and that's just the hardware, you still have to pay for a suitable SIM.
I can see why some people are drawn to the Starlink option at 1/3 of that price.
1. https://uk.store.ui.com/uk/en/category/internet-solutions/co...
You can get a 4g dongle with $20 for basic failover. There are also many other companies that sell cheaper 5G routers. Zte has several models.
Starlink only makes sense as a last resort if LTE coverage is not available in your area.
When here is local power outage and everyone switches to 4g/5g, it is overwhelmed and unusable.
Again this is location specific. I have a mini ups on my router/ont. And I assume that my provider also has a UPS, because even when power is out my landline connection just works.
And the local power outage takes out the 4g/5g mast too.
Yup, OP is from the UK. In the UK I got a ThreeUK business SIM for £49 that lasted 2 years with 500GB data. It sits in wan failover and manages about 50mbps which is perfect to keep most services running.
Very much location dependent though. I lived less than a mile from Southampton city centre for a while and could never get anything close to dial-up standard download/upload speeds. I've heard similar from London residents.
Yeah definitely. Where I am the coverage and speeds are decent on most networks.
I really REALLY want this, but I just can't give money to Musk.
I guarantee you, you’re giving money to people much worse than him every time you shop, without realizing it.
Yeah but that doesn't mean that you should give money to people where you know for sure they suck?
For all other cases, you can still try to not give money to people who suck by going for fair trade products and stuff like that.
> I guarantee you, you’re giving money to people much worse than him every time you shop, without realizing it.
Your assumption lies on the "without realizing it".
If you realize how bad the people are, you can do something about it.
The likes of Musk are extremely bad, and have been personally responsible for many, many abhorrent developments in both national and foreign stages.
Thus, it's natural that people avoid anything which is directly and indirectly tied to the likes of Elon Musk.
Don't you agree?
Everything is indirectly tied to musk. A well balanced portfolio has exposure to virtually everything on this planet. You buy nappies, you’re indirectly financing Musk. You post “i really want this” on hn, you’re indirectly financing Musk.
> If you realize how bad the people are, you can do something about it.
The problem is you have no idea what people are invested in what companies. How do you know that when you shop at $friendlySustainableCompany that people like Musk do not have shares there?
> The problem is you have no idea what people are invested in what companies.
That's not an argument that justifies in any way ignoring the people you do know.
Do you think it's ok to ignore the far-right activist who has been deeply involved in election fraud?
I can only be responsible for what I'm aware of, or can reasonably be expected to be aware of.
I, too, have a Starlink account for emergency backup service that I plan to switch over to Amazon LEO as soon as it's available. Lesser-evil principle at work again. Yes, there are things that aren't great about Amazon, but Amazon's practices are largely in sync with my capitalist values.
Musk's businesses are also compatible with my capitalist values, but those values don't include his special additional bonus values of Nazi-adjacent behavior, association with known pedophiles, sabotaging the government, or active subversion of elections. It's not a religious thing, it's just that given a choice, I'd rather support someone else.
His politics are less extreme than you probably think. Modern journalism goes for clicks, which means generating outrage.
> Modern journalism goes for clicks, which means generating outrage.
Is this about journalists talking about musk, or about musk himself? I mostly learn about his views through his own tweets that twitter always makes sure to serve me in my home page, and "goes for clicks"/"generating outrage" seems to fit well how musk uses his platform. In any case, his politics seem awful to me even without any journalistic mediation of them.
I've seen his tweets direct. You don't have to spin his opinions for them to look horrendous.
> His politics are less extreme than you probably think.
Just look at the whole DOGE mess. Brush aside anything you believe can be brushed aside due to incompetence. Look at the result.
Explain exactly what can possibly lead you to believe that his politics are less extreme than you possibly think.
You're talking about the Nazi salute guy, by the way.
Sure, and anyone who thinks that was a Nazi salute fell victim to clickbait.
"My heart goes out to you" with a throwing gesture that ends with your arm outstretched. Of course, only the final position was blasted all over the press.
> Sure, and anyone who thinks that was a Nazi salute fell victim to clickbait.
You need to be terribly naive to ignore the fact that the guy known for supporting a swath of fascist and far-right groups, to the point the guy even hosts their events, wasn't casually throwing around Nazi salutes.
please, defend mechahitler and the child pornography factory that is x.com the everything app
Did you see what DOGE did to the government? In particular to USAID? Estimates are that this has already killed hundreds of thousands of people who relied on that aid.
The issue isn't just Musk's politics. It's that his actions have been evil, the kind of negative impact that major wars have.
We're talking something like 1 million dead people per year with a quarter of those being children. For a level of assistance that cost the US nothing (0.43% of federal spending). This is an evil that in a few years puts you on the list of biggest mass murderers in history.
>USAID? Estimates are that this has already killed hundreds of thousands of people who relied on that aid.
I know this was “the line” upfront… but USAID had nothing to do with aid… it was a soft power factory… it was the “we’re helping” face of the CIA.
I don't understand this mentality.
What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance? Or Monsanto, or Shell, or any corporation both of us rely on and support, in return for being able to eat, fuel our car, etc.
Is it because Musk isn't lobbying behind the corporation but doing it publically?
I truly don't understand where ya'll draw the line.
I truly don't care what other people do or want, I just look to ensure I can live the life I desire while respecting that which others want or impose. As if me being angry or boycotting them will change their hearts. If it changes anything it's their tactics (more deception).
Another example is AI. I despise it, and honestly think it's evil. Yet I'm using it to secure financial stability in a way that does not require AI to sustain.
So when AI takes over my programming job I have the alternative already running, thanks to AI.
Don't reject the massive advantages of Starlink because of a man, just as you're not actively starving yourself despite our food supply being basically poison, caused by boards of men.
This passionate apologia of nihilism is not consistent with not caring what other people do or want. If "virtue signalling" elicits such reaction, perhaps it's actually working. Besides, voting with your wallet, an actual tangible action, is not virtue signalling.
How is it nihilism?
If you ever visit Bonaire let me know and I can show you the abundance of life we are stewarding on my land.
It's mostly setting healthy boundaries on what we perceive we can affect. I don't buy American food (except Cocoa Rice Crispies), functionally it's a boycott. Is that the reasoning? No, it just tastes like crap.
Choosing to stand up for your principles in one instance, doesn't mean you suddenly have to fight all the battles all at once, even those that aren't apparent you (yet). How do you know this person is not choosing principles on other occasions already? IMO doing this is better than doing nothing. You can always choose to pick up more battles later. Other people can fight the other fights. Everyone always choosing self over principles will be worse in the long run
How do you know that the shareholders and directors of the places you shop arent secretly way worse than Musk?
I literally don't, so I don't choose to be a moral warrior in that area. I would say healthiness is the main driver there.
There I read the labels and where possible buy local.
Elon is publicly terrible, on the Epstein list and supports the far right.
It's the easiest non support of my life, I don't use Twitter, don't have a Tesla, don't use grok.
Elon Musk is far from the nicest person in the world and there are many fair reasons to dislike him but he wasn't in "the Epstein list" (whatever that is), he was pictured with a number of other tech CEOs at a dinner with Epstein, who was a wealthy financier.
I stumbled on a long article post by John Conrad @johnkonrad about War on Rocks on X that explains this mentality. I haven't seen it put this way before.
What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance? Or Monsanto, or Shell, or any corporation both of us rely on and support, in return for being able to eat, fuel our car, etc. Is it because Musk isn't lobbying behind the corporation but doing it publically?
It's because Musk enjoys it.
Any other tu quoque fallacies to dispense with?
> What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance?
Open support for right-wing parties and politics all over the world.
Plus doing it to a hundred million followers and controlling the medium that delivers his message.
And then citizens get to vote on what they perceive as important.
If you can show me the list of people you boycotted due to open support for left-wing parties we can talk.
Or do we only attempt to silence those that have standpoints we don't agree with?
Let me know, I'm new to this silencing of opinion thing but I notice it's what society will democratically choose for given the loud voices in that direction.
> I don't understand this mentality.
I think it's pretty easy to understand.
You have a service you want, but subscribing to it is a clear and direct way to financially support the advancement of fascist, extremist political groups and regimes pushing alarmingly racist and xenophobic policies not only in the US but also across the world.
Does your convenience justify a totalitarian shift? I don't think so. Do you think it does?
It's going to shift anyway.
Wisdom is preparing for the shift using any legal means neccesary.
Morals are a mostly internal issue anyway, not based on solely external actions. You know the whole stealing bread to feed hungry children idea.
What you are doing we teach our kids to be virtue signaling. Nobody is saying or at least I am not assuming you support Musk if you have Starlink. I simply think you have need for sattelite internet.
Just like I don't automatically assume your reason for eating meat (if you do) is to show your approval for modern slaughtering practices. Or if you wear clothing... does that mean you support exploitative labour?
Also FYI nobody really cares about American policies outside the US. We're mostly busy insulating ourselves from the effects we're perceiving.
More European food cause your food is now weird, more Chinese stuff since you don't manufacture much anymore, less media content cause they all want to teach our kids about more genders we know about.
But we do love Starlink! Fastest internet we ever had here.
The totalitarian shift is coming from the attempt at being totalitarian.
Why did Musk buy Twitter? Do you remember how totalitarian-like Twitter was controlled?
Or do you wish me to forget since it was for the left?
The totalitarian shift is coming from people like you who feel like you have a total control on what is true and right. And from that standpoint you then declare others to be racist and xenophobic without attempting to truly understand their reasoning.
Not to mention the ever-increasing lack of tolerance for religion based views. Is it not your consitution that says that all men are born free, and are free to vote based on their OWN conciousness?
Yet they are labeled right-wingers and publically shamed and marginalized when possible. Even when all they want are federal repeals so each state can decide.
Do you not see that you guys have become the totalitarian ones? Wanting to impose how to view even life itself on others.
You know, the horse thing was probably a joke. He's probably not going to actually give you a horse. Right?
You know if your internet drops out you could just use your phone or idk not have internet for a bit.
You dont NEED a starlink like you need food or being able to commute etc.
Tesla, starlink are more a luxury for an average hn user.
My local internet is 5 Mbit. I am a programmer. Average latency to servers I work on is 200ms.
Tell me more about how Starlink is a luxury.
Especially considering it's a full $10 less than the monthly robbery by our local Telco.
I'm a fairly average HN user but I earn my livelihood by working from home. Backup connectivity is cheap.
I think this is one of my favorite comments on HN. Thank you for putting it into words.
This, I refuse to use anything he is even remotely part of.
I prefer having a 2nd wired connection as my backup. The satellite connection has some clear benefits, but it's still going to outer space. A DOCSIS failover won't suffer from rain fade or a something landing on the antenna.
If I've got a situation so bad it takes out both of my connections I've probably got bigger things to deal with than internet access.
The buried fiber getting cut by is really the only thing that kills the connection. Fiber can go for a long time without power from the local grid infrastructure. My cable provider has a mostly orthogonal failure mode (goes down like clockwork with the grid).
I have a second fiber connection and found out recently that both fibers come along the same route and when a fire took out a utility pole, I lost both connections.
I then found out that all providers bar one (there are 5 or 6) come along the same street.
So if you are going to go with this option choose carefully your providers!
This entirely.
“I like docsis”… cool, it turns to fiber 500ft after your house.
It honestly has to be very strong rain for it to create connection issues. I dont know where you live but here in germany we have that maybe once or twice a year with our antenna.
I live pretty rural and starlink has been worth the price over the last few years. When you compare it to dialup or hughesnet or viasat, it just works.
Same, right now it's great. I imagine we'll get enshittification soon enough when starlink gets enough lock in, but right now it's good.
> Set IPv6 Connection to SLAAC (this is critical - SLAAC must be used, not DHCPv6) [...] Set 'Prefix Delegation Size' to 56
Is this also A UniFi bug, is Starlink doing IPv6 address assignment in a weird way, or is this a normal/RFC-compliant way of assigning a /56 subnet to a router?
I always assumed routeable prefixes on v6 require DHCPv6 (except for hacks like RFC 7278 and /64 subnets)?
TIL standby mode. Is that enough to operate a remote webcam? Not real time video feed but say uploading a photo every 1 minute or so
Apparently you get unlimited data capped at 500 kbit/s. So that would be a clear "yes".
You can find something similar with IOT sims. And then you just need a standard 4g/5g dongle/router
Man, that 500kbit/s is quite generous for that price, can easily be used to access CCTV cameras in remote areas. I currently use LTE for that and it's 10 eur for 15GB data cap per month for that use case
I have no desire to give Elon Musk any money.
Whatever one might think about Elon Musk's posts on X, the engineering and achievements coming out of SpaceX are genuinely extraordinary and deserve a lot of respect.
Every so often I do the numbers on a backup Internet connection and decide that it's not worth it, but understand that it is useful for peace of mind reasons. My Internet is just too reliable. When I'm out of contract with my current provider I'll need to reconsider this as the supplier I'm likely to move to has no obvious/simple/integrated backup option.
tl;dr FTTP. A single outage event in 16 months, lasted 40 minutes, whilst asleep.
I'm in the UK and have FTTP through BT. Way back when I also purchased the 4G backup option (Hybrid Connect) that comes with this service. That's an extra £7.50/mo when taken as part of the usual 24-month contract. It's simple to setup and doesn't require any specific maintenance.
Looking back at the logs it's clear (from an actual usage perspective) it's not been worth the £7.50/mo I've been paying for it, but I'll admit it helped give me peace of mind when I was on-call for work so it is easy to justify.
The BT supplied router (which is required if you want to use their 4G backup hardware) keeps a log of "Resilience events".
In the 16 months I've had FTTP it has had exactly one "resilience event". A 40m11s outage that started at 00:20:05 on 28/11/2025. I was unaware of this outage as I was asleep.
It was really useful when I moved house though. I was in the middle of a 24-month contract with BT at my old address so I ported my contract to my new address. This meant they had to come round and install FTTP at the new property, which they couldn't do for a couple of weeks, so I was without home Internet for these two weeks.
Luckily the 4G "Hybrid Connect" backup device wasn't geo-locked (or if it was maybe BT overlooked it given there was an outstanding "Moving house" order on the account) and so it worked perfectly for the ~2 weeks between moving in and FTTP being installed. If this hadn't worked then a temporary 4G router would have worked just as well.
I had a bunch of "resilience events" for this period (it wasn't one continuous event as I was moving/restarting the broadband router for various reasons). During those 13 days the logs show 163GB download and 25GB upload. That's an average of ~150KBps (note the capital B there, in bits-per-second it is ~1.1Mbps) download.
In the 26 months prior to moving (where I was on ~75Mbps FTTC with BT) I had 3 "resilience events". 17m36s, 47m7s, 31m22s. All between midnight and 4am where I wouldn't have noticed, these were also within 1 month of each other, the other 25 months had no problems at all. None.
When my current contract comes to an end I'll move to a different supplier (probably Community Fibre as I can get symmetric 5Gbps for less than I'm paying BT for 1Gbps/120Mbps) and then not worry about a backup. If it is less reliable then I'll look for a solution then.
My current backup is simply to hotspot on my mobile with 5G (good signal here). Doesn't help the others in the house but they can fend for themselves. Neighbours have different suppliers or technologies (DOCSIS vs FTTP) so swapping wifi details would also be an option.
As others have pointed out, a local power-cut that takes out of the FTTP cabinet could easily take out the local 4G/5G masts making a 4G backup solution useless. If this happens I can just take my laptop to a nearby cafe or the co-working space I use. That kind of outage is very rare though round here.
Then again with the sums involved (under £10/month extra) it may just be easier (for peace of mind again) to just plump for something that doesn't really make amazing financial sense as it's just the cost of a pint or two a month.