BondingShouldBeFree VPN

[Chester A. Unal]

Daniel, Jonas.

On 23/05/2026 14:39, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2026 at 03:00:50PM +0200, Jonas Lochmann wrote:
>> I am combining multiple internet connections since many years for
>> companies based on cheap consumer internet connections. So I know
>> the topic and the possible solutions.
>>
>> When I looked last time into it, MPTCP was basically nowhere
>> supported. No protocol is useful if the other endpoint does not
>> support it. While QUIC is currently pushed, the multi path version
>> of it is not and it does not seem to distribute load well.
>> Did that change recently?

I've been keeping track of MP-QUIC for a while now. The RFC is still a
draft but there's a working group and they're making steady progress, last
I checked a few months ago. I'm waiting for the RFC to finalise and have a
proper implementation ready before I try it.

MPTCP has been a proper RFC since 2020. I'm in close contact with Matthieu
who's maintaining the Linux kernel implementation. I had led to a few MPTCP
bug fixes in the Linux kernel also. Apparently, someone from Cloudflare was
interested in enabling MPTCP on their global network, but that chap was
laid off at the end of 2025 so Matthieu's not sure what's going to happen
there.

>>
>> So you either depend on the other end supporting the protocol you
>> like or you make a tunnel. That's what you do according to the forum
>> posts. So in the end, you are selling a VPN with another marketing
>> than your competitors.

You could say that, but there are many variables in the BSBF solution which
differ from your average VPN provider for the purpose of providing bonded
network access.

> 
> You can run the server-side yourself, so from what I understood the
> "sale" here is mostly for a (open) protocol stack to implement
> asymmetric link aggregation (as opposed to using proprietary,
> vendor-specific solutions to do the same thing, eg. MikroTik)

Yes. The BSBF solution also includes server-side setup so if you're a
company that wants to provide network bonding to your clients, you just use
both the BSBF server and client solutions.

On top of that, I've got concepts of a plan to make the server-side very
easy to scale (moving away from using a VPS as server-side). So I'm looking
for a company with a global network to partner with.

> 
>>
>>> I provide services to ISPs and other interested parties to implement
>>> the solution to their infrastructure. Contact me here.
>>
>> Why should an ISP care about that? In my country, there is an ISP
>> selling a bonded solution but this is an expensive ISP and even
>> with bonding cheaper ISPs provide better connectivity. It looks
>> like this ISP bought some hardware/software solution for that that
>> includes their network infrastructure and the device for the end user.
> 
> Not all (esp. wireless) ISPs operate on their own physical infrastructure.
> Some developing countries still rely primarily on 4G/5G mobile backhaul,
> or even copper for the last mile.
> 
> And especially in those emerging markets aggregating multile mobile
> network uplinks of different operator networks is the only way to gain
> reliable connectivity.

I worked for a company in South Africa for a while. This is how it went
there: The clients that want bonded network access, where they are, go to
an ISP. The ISP, being the middle man, use our bonding solution and provide
it to their client. Hospitals, industrial businesses, and events streamers
were the usual suspects. Ever heard of BCX? They were the biggest client of
my SA company a few months back. I and my SA company ended things two
months ago, they had bigger problems in the company and the head chap had
different ideas how to do bonding.

Jonas, I'm working on spinning up a company where I start selling a full
solution. What are your circumstances? Would you like to band together?

Chester A.