MVNO vs Real Network

Hi all!

So i'm venturing into the mobile broadband world, as my life is revolving around increased travelling across the country and so I'm looking for some deals.

I stumbled upon Smarty, running off the Three network - £25 for unlimited everything on a 1 monther. So i'm tempted. But I just wanted to know if anyone has ever encountered differing speeds between a main network provider, and a subsequent MVNO.

Do main networks prioritise their own customers first in terms of speed etc, and then give lower priority to MVNO customers? Or is it consistent throughout, just a different label?

Any insight would be awesome!
Thanks!

Hi,

I�m using Smarty. In one month I�ve used 960gb. The speed is exactly the same as Three. In fact Three own Smarty - it�s where they can try our new ideas. They use the Three internet APN so ping is also quite good. Great service given you have no contract so nothing to lose if your areas is oversubscribed or signal cannot get through walls.

If you haven�t ordered already I can recommend you and you will get a free month and £10 Amazon voucher. I get between 30-40mb peak and up to 50mb when the mast isn�t busy.

Cheers Gary, good to know!
Happy to use your referral, especially if there's a free Amazon card in it! Drop me a DM!
Have you had any experience with port forwarding through this service? Would be useful to know!

Edited by Nitro93 (Mon 29-Jul-19 19:31:25)

I haven't tried port forwarding, however if you have an example of what your are wanting to do I could give it a go? I know the Xbox says it's behind a NAT, however things like Neos cameras do work without any fiddling around. Also, my works VPN (Cisco) works fine without any work arounds needed.

IP address given to me at moment is 94.197 which I believe means I am not behind a CG NAT

Edited by gary333 (Mon 29-Jul-19 20:01:18)

In reply to a post by gary333:

I haven't tried port forwarding, however if you have an example of what your are wanting to do I could give it a go? I know the Xbox says it's behind a NAT, however things like Neos cameras do work without any fiddling around. Also, my works VPN (Cisco) works fine without any work arounds needed.

IP address given to me at moment is 94.197 which I believe means I am not behind a CG NAT

Yep it's mostly for if/when this replaces my landline (speed dependent). I basically have a Synology Diskstation with a Virtual Machine that needs port 80 to run a web server, and CCTV running on a couple of ports through Surveillance Station. I assume that if I used a VPN though that this wouldn't be too much of an issue if I end up being a CG-NAT?

I've just tried port forwarding for my Reolink CCTV system and I can get it to give me access remotely. Unfortunately don't have anyway of testing a VM / web server as don't have one of those

I have a Reolink RLC-410W linked wirelessly to my Three Huawei 311B router, uploading a file through it with its (the camera's) built-in FTP server to my own cloud storage, (not Reolink's), as soon as a file reaches 1MB, which if there's any activity is a few minutes worth. About 300MB per day.

There's also a 32GB card in the camera where the files are created for the FTP and over-written when that is full.

I have the Reolink app on my Windows laptop using the same router wirelessly, and on my iPad and Android phone. So I can access either the local card for recent history, or my cloud for older stuff, or any device for the live feed from Reolink itself using the app. (I have unlimited data from Three on the router SIM and my phone SIM).

No port forwarding or anything. I just set up the wifi connections as normal, and the FTP server via the app.

Of course if I paid Reolink for their storage the live feed would be being copied seamlessly but I'm happy with the short period before the FTP kicks in.

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 29-Jul-19 21:52:55)

I have the Reolink NVR with wired IP cameras. If you use their software you can get it to work via the UID (which is how I normally have it) so no need to forward. However to test port forwarding out I accessed outside of their software and it worked fine (although took me time to figure it out). This means no need for client as it accesses the NVR directly.

In reply to a post by gary333:

I've just tried port forwarding for my Reolink CCTV system and I can get it to give me access remotely. Unfortunately don't have anyway of testing a VM / web server as don't have one of those

Is that directly through the IP address or through a Dynamic DNS service? If through the IP, that's excellent news!

I tried it through the IP address for remote view, however as soon as the IP address changes I would assume it�s game over. I don�t use this method normally as I prefer the app and that works via P2P so doesn�t need any port changes.

In reply to a post by gary333:

I tried it through the IP address for remote view, however as soon as the IP address changes I would assume it�s game over. I don�t use this method normally as I prefer the app and that works via P2P so doesn�t need any port changes.

Gotcha, fingers crossed similar situation this end - appreciate you sharing your experience, really helpful!

I've just rebooted the router to see what happens and now I can't get anything to work (using the new IP address i've been allocated). All ports show "not responding" when doing a port scan. Hmm, not my field of expertise so cannot figure it out but looks like it might be tempremental.

My router's IP address changes quite often. No problems are caused.

Oh - of course, I don't have their NVR. I don't have anyone's. Just camera, card in the camera, and the FTP uploads. If I chose to pay Reolink for their cloud storage, AIUI I still wouldn't need an NVR.

Everything just works, and will continue so to do as I add more cameras.

Oh - at the testing stage I did have the camera storing automatically via FTP on a laptop wired to the B311. Of course that was still file by file.

Maybe I didn't make it clear earlier that my phone has full remote access to live streaming as well, via the Android app.

Edited by RobertoS (Tue 30-Jul-19 01:06:02)

I�ve had no problems when using the Reolink app no matter how many times the WAN IP changes, been using them for years no probs.

I could access cameras via browser and IP address (was testing this for whether opening ports works) and until I rebooted it did. Now I cannot open up any ports after rebooting the B525 even though the rules are in place in the router. Wondering if I�m now hit CGNAT IP range, or three are blocking it somehow. Or maybe it�s just Huawei�s poor router software. Unfortunately no spare router to feed connection through to validate if it�s my B525 or Three.

App on the I phone and computer still work fine as that doesn�t require port forwarding as it uses Reolink as a middleman for shifting data. Issue here (well sort of as I don�t need this functionality as it was just for testing) is connecting directly to my Router via a browser and typing in my three/Smarty IL address + port number no longer routes directly to the NVR/cameras screen.

Edited by gary333 (Tue 30-Jul-19 01:22:56)

It's OK. I've just realised that you are only trying port forwarding for the OP. Not that you needed it for yourself.

Sorry for confusing things .

I'm on Smarty and as far as I can see I've always been given a CGNAT private IP address, meaning inbound port forwarding wouldn't be possible.

The main problem I can see with MVNO is when the network operator decides to reconfigure the transmitters "to give a better service", and makes things worse like EE has just done locally, so we now frequently loose all 2G,3G&4G at once, when we only use them via MVNO it can be awkward complain about the changes. At least when Three does it, we have direct contact with them.

You might find EE had no choice, a landlord may have decided to evict their equipment from the roof of a building, or decided to quadruple rent, so EE removed. This sort of thing happens all the time. The customer call centre can only say generically "reconfiguring" as they won't know the reason.

More a problem if you're in a city than in a residential / rural area with towers. In cities you find transmitters are hidden on buildings.