This subreddit is here to provide unofficial technical support to people who use or want to dive into the world of Ubiquiti products. If you haven’t already been descriptive in your post, please take the time to edit it and add as many useful details as you can.
Ubiquiti makes a great tool to help with figuring out where to place your access points and other network design questions located at:
I guess some people have noted that it doesn’t have the specs or features that other routers offer, but it makes up for it in size and the fact that it can be easily powered by a battery pack. That makes it ideal for this type of usage.
I like the size, definitely lacking features. My glinet can also be powered from a battery bank and isn't much larger. Is what it is. I have this travel router and I'm not overly impressed.
Once the software gets better and it works without randomly restarting, it'll be a cool tool to have. My glinet may still be the main, since that just works perfectly and can also be powered via usb c.
I've read that you have to SSH into the device to update it, but I've been unable to ssh into it. Mine seems to be working okay, though I haven't really done much with it to test it. I can't see what version of the firmware it's on either.
Yeah, the SSH function was available on the EA version of the iOS app before it was removed on the newer release! The only way to check the version is when you SSH! Makes no sense!
Mine came with a buggy version.224 which cased the UTR to reboot after connecting!
Nope! Going to try today. I just tried it the day I got it and saw no new firmware, although apparently people were able to SSH and update it. If it's organically available today I'll try it, thanks!
I use the Beryl. It's significantly larger than the UniFi device but still "small" for a router.
What I am REALLY interested in is the upcoming Mudi 7 from GLi.net. 5G/WiFi7 with integrated battery for slightly larger footprint than the new UniFi device. It will be SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than either unit listed above, with the inclusion of dual SIM 5G, but I'll use it as a travel router AND dual WAN while home.
I saw somewhere that they are planning on having the final (or near final build) at CES 2026, so I would assume public release wouldn't be too long after that. They've already had a few of the details public for quite some time.
Copy. Thank you! Glad I saw this thread. I was awaiting a stock alert for the UTR but now will bypass and wait for the Mudi 7. I wanted 5G, battery, and WiFi 7. Don’t care that it will cost more, convenience over price for me.
They look like they’re really working in great products. I’m not sure how much demand there is for travel routers, but the market is getting quite competitive.
It's one of those things that CAN make your life easier and more secure, if you leverage it. But I do agree that the market is small. For me it's a must for all travel for business or pleasure. Or for someone who works on-the-go at coffee shops, hotel lobbies, airports, restaurants, etc. All of my devices instantly connect and have a secure connection back to my home Network. There is zero concern for security while sitting in some random breakfast joint, eating a bagel and checking investments.
It's one of those technologies that you don't realize how tremendously beneficial they can be until you own one.
I have the baryl and the slate 7. Both have worked without an issue for years and I prefer them over the ubiquiti. Not sure any firmware updates could change my mind.
I think the form factor is the only nice thing about the UTR, as of this post. Not sure if firmware updates will fix a lot of what people are complaining about.
The form factor is much better than the glinet travel router I have, imo.
I have an old "Ravpower" travel router that is very outdated now (12 years old), but it has an internal battery. What a great feature that was. I miss that on modern travel routers.
I like to check things out for myself. i can see the size of the device and speed of ports on the website, sure. But that doesn't get into real details, like boot time, transfer speeds, WiFi range/speeds in my environment, general capabilities. Once it's been in my hand, setup, and tested, it's slower and less capable of my glinet. I'm probably going to return it.
To add to my last comment here, the Unifi Travel Router only consumes 5w, while the GL iNet Slate 7 consumes 18w. They can both be run off a battery pack, but one will last significantly longer.
(wattage was pulled directly from their spec sheet on the manufacturer's webpage)
But, in terms of the Ethernet ports, and WiFi version, etc., the UTR is closer to the older models (e.g. Beryl). It doesn’t make much sense to compare it to the Slate 7’s power draw.
I think it's a fine comparison because it shows a big trade off. The Slate 7 wins in features. If you're the type that wants WiFi 7 in your travel router then the Slate 7 wins easily. If you need something that runs a long time on battery and is just a bit bigger than a credit card or wallet then the UniFi Travel Router is your best option. The UniFi option is also very limited in options and settings, at least for now. Slate 7 doesn't lose out by comparing it with the UniFi option by any means.
If I were travelling a lot and stayed at a single place for an extended period of time, then I'd jump all over the Slate 7 or Beryl 7. Normally, when I need a travel router, I just need something simple for over night or for a couple days and I want my devices to just pick up and run like they're at home.
I expect also the Gl.inet to have better Wifi signal due to his external antennas - can someone test this as well, for both of them? I would love to see a comparison....
I am thinking at the awfull WiFi signal provided by hotels, where you need to keep the router to the room's door for a little bit of extra signal.....not to my own devices.
Almost every Hotel I've stayed at has an AP in nearly every room these days. If they don't it also likely means the internet is so bad you might as well tether.
One of my use cases is on cruises and let family connect to it also. I walk around with it in a tiny backpack. So better signal means family can stay connected when they walk over to the bar to get a drink or something.
I compared it to the device I already own. The device is about twice the size, has more features, and larger antennas. But it can also be powered by a portable battery or my laptop.
Meanwhile this thing can’t replicate my entire UniFi wireless environment. If I have to pick specific SSIDs I can just do what I do now, which is replicate SSIDs and passwords. It works well, and UniFi hasn’t given me a reason to move on from my existing hardware.
That works in most cases, but I have trouble with non-Apple devices being able to see the wifi because it stops broadcasting after a while and I have to reconnect it. This solves that problem for me.
I mean I use wifi on a plane like twice a year. I would need several years for the device to pay for itself even with this use case. I get some people are into this device but it just seems pretty niche for most people and underwhelming compared to other devices on the market.
I have this, a Beryl AX, Slate AX, and a few other devices that I am under NDA about. The Ubiquiti router doesn't have the features of the GL.iNet devices, can be powered by power banks, and are not much bigger - the size of a deck of cards. Further, they have the ability to setup VPNs, AdGuard, and so much more that this cannot run.
How good is Gl.iNet equipment? Asus has copied their footprint and general layout. GL.iNet came up with the form factor back in 2020 with the Brume W. I have seen so many online reviewers praising the general design of Asus's travel router that refuse to acknowledge that the design came from GL.iNet. I am talking to you Dong!
OP says they can share wifi while connected to wifi and you chime in to say a MacBook can as well, but then say that it can only through ethernet. weird
All these other travel routers can also vpn the whole connection to the remote vpn server with a one-touch physical switch on the units. Oh they have way more vpn options available.
Sooooo this was a real point of Contention for me. I have wireguard setup and was rather annoyed this needs teleport vpn enables to work... So I enabled teleport vpn and it literally never connected. I turned teleport vpn off and my wireguard back on and everything worked. Not sure if it was user error or something else but as far as simplicity goes I am still trying to figure out the whole wifi routing of my network through this thing. The wifi I spit out on the plane wad the planes wifi as that was the only ssid available to me.
meh. this happens on enterprise firewalls too... ipsec tries to establish a tunnel but is unable and traffic has to be re-initiated, it's becuase where you ended last time was not where you started today.....
Yes, this is correct, it also seems it might matter based on which version you have. With iOS it doesn't seem that the firmware version is visible, it just says 'up to date' and on android you can see the firmware version.
In what I'm reading and in the testing I've done, on the initial firmware release, the UTR uses the ISP DNS servers of the current WAN uplink.
DNS issue is fixed now in latest update. I’m on iOS so I had to install TestFlight UniFi app. Enable SSH and manually update the UTR and now everything works as expected.
Same. Been doing this for at least 5 years. I use unifi for everything except for the GLI.net travel router. With battery too. Good price point on this new unit from ubiquity though.
As someone who recently switched to iPhone from android (having been an iPhone user in the past until iPhone 6) it’s frustrating to see Apple omit such a basic feature as enabling a hotspot that shares the phone’s active internet connection - whether that internet connection be from cellular or from another WiFi network.
On android, it’s possible to make a WiFi hotspot that is routed to either your phone’s cellular or WiFi, depending on which is currently being used for internet access. I learned on a recent flight that iPhone doesn’t support this, which is disappointing.
Ideally, Apple would enable support for this, and there would be no need to go out of your way to spoof the MAC onto another device.
Yeah I think we’re both saying the same thing, just in slightly different ways. It looks like this bit of Claude’s brain-dump is the same as what you’re saying:
“The chip needs to either operate both on the same channel or rapidly switch between channels, which can impact performance.”
Overall my point is that Android supports this, and thanks to your link it looks like they have since Android 9, so for over 7 years. Apple could implement this, but chooses not to.
i just got my UTR and haven't had the opportunity to travel with it yet, but based on the reviews so far, i'm still packing my glinet for awhile. I've never thought to use a travel router while on the plane, since i usually just connect to the wifi with my android phone and the rest of the family piggybacks off the hotspot.
This. It blows my mind that people are making it more complicated. There are plenty of uses for a travel router but sharing one WiFi signup on a plane is stupid simple.
If you have T-Mobile, which includes free data access on flights, but only for devices with phone numbers (in other words, only phones, not laptops or tablets). This is a perfect use case for a travel router on a plane.
Depends on who you fly and what the WiFi actually provides access to. AA gives you free WiFi to access their media library, but you have to pay to get out to the internet.
He said from his “secondary device that he didn’t pay” to use WiFi on so I would assume he did it from his phone, the router copied its Mac and transmitted the allowed Mac internet service from the paid? Device to any other devices on the router WiFi that now share the same Mac.
You don’t have to do all that. Just make the router connect to the WiFi, connect phone to the travel router, and pay for access. The paid MAC address will be the router
Connect one or more client devices to travel router
Use any client device (currently on the travel router) to access the captive portal and login/pay
Done. All client devices are effectively paid now and all have Internet access through the travel router.
There is no need to mess with MAC addresses or clone anything.
This works because the travel router makes all your devices appear to the upstream connection as using the travel router's mac address. If you pay on your laptop, while connected through the travel router, then it is the travel router's mac that is recorded as paid. All your devices behind the travel router appear to have the travel router's MAC address, so they are all considered to have paid now.
It's a "router" with NAT so there's no copying MAC address or anything, beyond what NAT normally does.
The way that the plane's WiFi detects that there are multiple devices behind a single wifi client MAC is from the TTL of the packets. The TTL is supposed to be decremented by one for every hop it goes through. The packets coming from the router directly (like, the router trying to update it's firmware or something) will have a different TTL than all of the devices in its LAN.
The way you get around this restriction with these travel routers, is you just don't decrement the TTL. It's that easy. It's technically against the ethernet spec but whatever. This is what some phones will also do for their tethering/hotspot for their client devices, so your cellular provider doesn't know its tethering (many cellular providers have "unlimited" data but limit tethering to a few GB/month).
I didn't have to spoof anything and it took some tinkering. It was not very intuitive as I did sign up with my phone first for wifi. Then after plugging this device in I had to then transfer the wifi to the device but once it was working the wifi was seamless. As far as spoofing the Mac, this is above my pay grade as I'm not even really sure how I got it working.
Its not really spoofing, per say. What's happening behind the scenes is that the travel router shows up as a single mac address for all the routed traffic behind it (all your devices with their own unique mac address). No spoofing is needed because unitedwifi only allows one device at a time once you've paid but lets to swap devices and disconnects the other one. So the router looks like that single device to united's gateway, via its mac.
Dunno how long that will be necessary as their starlink internet is now rolling out to the fleet.
Did you try paying for WiFi through the travel router first? I’m curious to see if that extra step of: “pay thru phone-> connect travel router first-> transfer WiFi to UTR” is really needed or if you can connect travel router and then pay directly through captive portal.
Either way this is my #1 use case so hoping to see more people report that it works.
It doesn't have to. It's a router, that's how it works. To the downstream systems, any device connecting through the router will have the routers IP and MAC.
This was discussed previously in many other threads. Functionality is needed for MAC Address based WiFi purchases. Think “premium” plans in hotels that are tied to your device, cruise ships, airplanes too. While it’s fine if you make the purchase and then walk around with the travel router 24/7, it’s not good at all if you want to also be able to leave the travel router in your room as you go chill by the pool.
Oh and I forgot to mention one very obvious thing, the hotel/cruise whatever can see the MAC Address, and sometimes they do go through trouble of blocking non-end-user devices. So pretending to be an iPhone, a pixel or whatever is essential
You can tell there is something on your network, but if it’s a MAC starting 02 for example it could be anything. Or if it’s a bad actor, it could be cloning a MAC to for example look like a SIP phone. I said you can’t “definitively” tell.
Phones having random MAC addresses still keep the device identifier, for the most part anyway. Hence my examples, that are still valid and used by people.
I don’t understand the aggressiveness, the feature exists on every travel router out there except UTR, which will likely have this feature in the future. Why be so against it?
What you determine as “basic functionality” is a niche function that maybe 1% of people use. Nothing against adding a feature but insinuating it’s practically useless without it is ridiculous.
Does onboard Wi-Fi even filter by MAC? I thought not for 2 reasons.. Apple devices by default will provide randomized addresses (interesting chance of losing your connection after paying) and I thought generally you could get Wi-Fi by spoofing a paid ip address?
The idea is you connect the UTR to the paid WiFi, through the Unifi Network app and that will forward the portal to your phone. Just pay/login as you would normally, and the UTR proxies the request but with its own device data.
I actually plugged the usb c directly into my phone and the phone powered it. Did it eat my battery? Yes. Was it worth it? Also yes. Had the power bank ready to charge me back up as soon as I got off the plane.
What's the difference between a laptop battery, a phone battery and a power bank? I just checked Lufthansa and they allow power banks. You are not allowed to have them in checked bags which makes sense. But normal sized power banks absolutely are allowed on most flights
I would say it’s easier to get a crap power bank than a defective phone/laptop battery. Check out the recent fire incident in flight, they most likely come from power banks not phone or laptop.
While a normal sized power bank is always allowed in cabin, some airlines ask you to not put them in the overhead bin or to not use them in-flight.
Airlines are just creating rules to avoid incidents.
Phone and laptop batteries usually are by decent size companies with quality control. Many power banks are off-brand with unknown quality batteries and protection.
KLM have started prohibiting the use of all power banks during flight now. They mention it on all flights now. The same applies to most airlines I’ve been on in the past few months Singapore, Ryanair, aer lingus, air Asia etc
The charging of power banks are not allowed on Lufthansa flights. Needed to check again for this, since I got this wrong in my head. But the complete use of power banks are banned on certain airlines anyways. Take Pegasus for example.
Common misconception. The only restriction for power banks on flights is you can’t leave them in your checked baggage, they are only allowed in your carry-on or personal item. (In the US, at least)
Not true at all. Virgin Australia has implemented new restrictions on power banks effective from December 1, 2025, prohibiting their use during flights. You can bring em in the cabin, but can't plug them in.
? Most airlines do not prohibit power banks on flights. What they do prohibit is putting lithium ion batteries in your checked luggage. That includes powerbanks but also any Li-Ion rechargeable device. If a fire starts in the cargo hold... we'll just look at UPS Flight 6 back in 2010 out of Dubai 😢.
It's an excellent product for some cases; for travel, it meets my needs. Are there other products with more features? Yes, but this is just convenient and easy to use.
Did the same recently but with my phone, paid the £18.99 full flight data and shared it with the whole family, worked wonderfully, was getting 70+ Mb across the Atlantic.
I wonder if as more people do this, what the RF environment in the plane will look like. Would it interfere with the plane’s WiFi performance or the aircraft itself at some point?
On Android you just turn on your hotspot while connected to Wi-Fi and any clients that connect to your hotspot will get shared through the Wi-Fi network to which your phone is connected.
Love it! These on-board services typically only allow a single device to be logged in at any point in time. Smart idea to share a single plane Wi-Fi login with multiple devices, i.e. whole family! You could probably power it from the plane usb ‘charger’ slot.
Yeah i actually used my phone because I didn't feel like digging our a longer cable. The one it comes with is usb c to usb c and is only one foot long so it was small and easy to carry
I find that modern Android phones can do Bluetooth tethering and hotspot (while connected to wifi). So there's never a need for me to use travel router (which can do this since ages and cost like 20$).
I don't know exactly which devices can do this, but certainly on modern Samsung phones you don't need to do bluetooth tethering (which is quite slow). You can just do wifi-to-wifi hotspot, just like a travel router.
The option to enable this is a bit hidden though. On Samsung phones:
Go to hotspot settings and tap on the network name. Scroll down and tap on advanced. Scroll down and find "wifi sharing" and turn it on. Once you have flipped that setting to on, the wifi upstream connection will stop turning off when you enable hotspot mode. Enabling hotspot will simply share the current Internet connection, whatever it happens to be.
For me, this has replaced the majority of my need for a travel router. However, sometimes I still set the travel router up just so my laptop stays on the Internet when I leave the room with my phone. That way it can keep working on big downloads or whatever while I'm gone.
Hello! Thanks for posting on r/Ubiquiti!
This subreddit is here to provide unofficial technical support to people who use or want to dive into the world of Ubiquiti products. If you haven’t already been descriptive in your post, please take the time to edit it and add as many useful details as you can.
Ubiquiti makes a great tool to help with figuring out where to place your access points and other network design questions located at:
https://design.ui.com
If you see people spreading misinformation or violating the "don't be an asshole" general rule, please report it!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I guess some people have noted that it doesn’t have the specs or features that other routers offer, but it makes up for it in size and the fact that it can be easily powered by a battery pack. That makes it ideal for this type of usage.
I like the size, definitely lacking features. My glinet can also be powered from a battery bank and isn't much larger. Is what it is. I have this travel router and I'm not overly impressed.
Once the software gets better and it works without randomly restarting, it'll be a cool tool to have. My glinet may still be the main, since that just works perfectly and can also be powered via usb c.
Have you updated yours to the newest firmware? Mine was restarting on the firmware that it came with. The update fixes that!
I've read that you have to SSH into the device to update it, but I've been unable to ssh into it. Mine seems to be working okay, though I haven't really done much with it to test it. I can't see what version of the firmware it's on either.
Yeah, the SSH function was available on the EA version of the iOS app before it was removed on the newer release! The only way to check the version is when you SSH! Makes no sense! Mine came with a buggy version.224 which cased the UTR to reboot after connecting!
That's helpful information. Thank you.
Nope! Going to try today. I just tried it the day I got it and saw no new firmware, although apparently people were able to SSH and update it. If it's organically available today I'll try it, thanks!
Which gli.net router do you guys use? And how much larger is it's footprint in comparison?
I use the Beryl. It's significantly larger than the UniFi device but still "small" for a router.
What I am REALLY interested in is the upcoming Mudi 7 from GLi.net. 5G/WiFi7 with integrated battery for slightly larger footprint than the new UniFi device. It will be SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than either unit listed above, with the inclusion of dual SIM 5G, but I'll use it as a travel router AND dual WAN while home.
Thanks. The Mudi 7 does look great. If they did a cheaper option without 5G, I'd be interested
The Mudi v2, which is 4G only, is out now and roughly $150.
Thanks! Will check it out
Thanks for the heads up on the Mudi 7, do you know when it is expected to come out and for how much? Looks way better than the UTR.
No idea
I saw somewhere that they are planning on having the final (or near final build) at CES 2026, so I would assume public release wouldn't be too long after that. They've already had a few of the details public for quite some time.
Copy. Thank you! Glad I saw this thread. I was awaiting a stock alert for the UTR but now will bypass and wait for the Mudi 7. I wanted 5G, battery, and WiFi 7. Don’t care that it will cost more, convenience over price for me.
They look like they’re really working in great products. I’m not sure how much demand there is for travel routers, but the market is getting quite competitive.
It's one of those things that CAN make your life easier and more secure, if you leverage it. But I do agree that the market is small. For me it's a must for all travel for business or pleasure. Or for someone who works on-the-go at coffee shops, hotel lobbies, airports, restaurants, etc. All of my devices instantly connect and have a secure connection back to my home Network. There is zero concern for security while sitting in some random breakfast joint, eating a bagel and checking investments.
It's one of those technologies that you don't realize how tremendously beneficial they can be until you own one.
I have the baryl and the slate 7. Both have worked without an issue for years and I prefer them over the ubiquiti. Not sure any firmware updates could change my mind.
Have you held the UTR? it is tiny and slim! It can easily fit in a dress shirt pocket. Glinet is definitely much larger!
Yes, my UTR was delivered yesterday. Sure, it's small, but my baryl router isn't so much larger that I can't take it with me places.
Depends on the place! On an airplane, at a coffee shop, the UTR makes more sense. At a hotel glinet wins !
I think the form factor is the only nice thing about the UTR, as of this post. Not sure if firmware updates will fix a lot of what people are complaining about.
The form factor is much better than the glinet travel router I have, imo.
Want to sell it? 😜
I have an old "Ravpower" travel router that is very outdated now (12 years old), but it has an internal battery. What a great feature that was. I miss that on modern travel routers.
https://gadgetviper.com/ravpower-filehub-portable-wifi-router/
These days I rarely pull the travel router out though. I usually just use my phone as a travel router.
Why get the router if all the specs arent good to you? Never understood that
I like to check things out for myself. i can see the size of the device and speed of ports on the website, sure. But that doesn't get into real details, like boot time, transfer speeds, WiFi range/speeds in my environment, general capabilities. Once it's been in my hand, setup, and tested, it's slower and less capable of my glinet. I'm probably going to return it.
I wish I could be in a point in life to spend 100 dollars to see how things are lol. But yeah I hear ya. Enjoy your glinet!
The size is really the only advantage this has over Glinet's offerings (which are also USB powered and have no problem running off of battery packs)
The integration into existing UniFi networks is also a huge benefit.
True
To add to my last comment here, the Unifi Travel Router only consumes 5w, while the GL iNet Slate 7 consumes 18w. They can both be run off a battery pack, but one will last significantly longer.
(wattage was pulled directly from their spec sheet on the manufacturer's webpage)
But, in terms of the Ethernet ports, and WiFi version, etc., the UTR is closer to the older models (e.g. Beryl). It doesn’t make much sense to compare it to the Slate 7’s power draw.
I think it's a fine comparison because it shows a big trade off. The Slate 7 wins in features. If you're the type that wants WiFi 7 in your travel router then the Slate 7 wins easily. If you need something that runs a long time on battery and is just a bit bigger than a credit card or wallet then the UniFi Travel Router is your best option. The UniFi option is also very limited in options and settings, at least for now. Slate 7 doesn't lose out by comparing it with the UniFi option by any means.
If I were travelling a lot and stayed at a single place for an extended period of time, then I'd jump all over the Slate 7 or Beryl 7. Normally, when I need a travel router, I just need something simple for over night or for a couple days and I want my devices to just pick up and run like they're at home.
Consumes up to*
Correct. Someone else did the measurements of an actual running Ubiquiti Travel Router and it was consuming around 2-3 watts and no more.
I expect also the Gl.inet to have better Wifi signal due to his external antennas - can someone test this as well, for both of them? I would love to see a comparison....
Yea, but how much range do you really need for a travel router? You're usually using it in close proximity to the device.
I am thinking at the awfull WiFi signal provided by hotels, where you need to keep the router to the room's door for a little bit of extra signal.....not to my own devices.
Almost every Hotel I've stayed at has an AP in nearly every room these days. If they don't it also likely means the internet is so bad you might as well tether.
Go to eastern Europe and try to find such hotels....an AP to half a floor is usually the norm on the seaside....
And how is the quality of the internet it provides typically? There's a certain tradeoff on quality that makes it worth trying or not.
One of my use cases is on cruises and let family connect to it also. I walk around with it in a tiny backpack. So better signal means family can stay connected when they walk over to the bar to get a drink or something.
New cruise ships 100% have a solidly build WiFi infrastructure with actual wireless surveys to ensue coverage.
I'd say they are on par with most coverage within the US compared to u/Upstairs_Recording81 's commentary about Europe.
I'm talking about my family connecting to my router, not my router connecting to the cruise.
I compared it to the device I already own. The device is about twice the size, has more features, and larger antennas. But it can also be powered by a portable battery or my laptop.
Meanwhile this thing can’t replicate my entire UniFi wireless environment. If I have to pick specific SSIDs I can just do what I do now, which is replicate SSIDs and passwords. It works well, and UniFi hasn’t given me a reason to move on from my existing hardware.
I just connect to the wifi and hotspot from my phone
That works in most cases, but I have trouble with non-Apple devices being able to see the wifi because it stops broadcasting after a while and I have to reconnect it. This solves that problem for me.
I mean I use wifi on a plane like twice a year. I would need several years for the device to pay for itself even with this use case. I get some people are into this device but it just seems pretty niche for most people and underwhelming compared to other devices on the market.
I have this, a Beryl AX, Slate AX, and a few other devices that I am under NDA about. The Ubiquiti router doesn't have the features of the GL.iNet devices, can be powered by power banks, and are not much bigger - the size of a deck of cards. Further, they have the ability to setup VPNs, AdGuard, and so much more that this cannot run.
How good is Gl.iNet equipment? Asus has copied their footprint and general layout. GL.iNet came up with the form factor back in 2020 with the Brume W. I have seen so many online reviewers praising the general design of Asus's travel router that refuse to acknowledge that the design came from GL.iNet. I am talking to you Dong!
Not really, well maybe if no other options were available. Check out GL.iNet devices.
Nice, been doing it for years with my gli.net travel router. They should’ve made one earlier.
Android phones have been able to share the currently connected wifi via hotspot forever, as well
A MacBook can as well, at least through Ethernet
OP says they can share wifi while connected to wifi and you chime in to say a MacBook can as well, but then say that it can only through ethernet. weird
And Windows, which has come in clutch a bunch.
how?
https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/share-internet-connection-mac-network-users-mchlp1540/mac
The one thing that interests me most about the UTR is seamless VPN to the office UniFi network.
All these other travel routers can also vpn the whole connection to the remote vpn server with a one-touch physical switch on the units. Oh they have way more vpn options available.
Sooooo this was a real point of Contention for me. I have wireguard setup and was rather annoyed this needs teleport vpn enables to work... So I enabled teleport vpn and it literally never connected. I turned teleport vpn off and my wireguard back on and everything worked. Not sure if it was user error or something else but as far as simplicity goes I am still trying to figure out the whole wifi routing of my network through this thing. The wifi I spit out on the plane wad the planes wifi as that was the only ssid available to me.
WireGuard support is now in the Travel Router. Seems to have just gotten added. You can use that instead of Teleport.
meh. this happens on enterprise firewalls too... ipsec tries to establish a tunnel but is unable and traffic has to be re-initiated, it's becuase where you ended last time was not where you started today.....
Some people are reporting that DNS doesn’t go through the vpn and so some features aren’t working as they expected on their networks.
Yes, this is correct, it also seems it might matter based on which version you have. With iOS it doesn't seem that the firmware version is visible, it just says 'up to date' and on android you can see the firmware version.
In what I'm reading and in the testing I've done, on the initial firmware release, the UTR uses the ISP DNS servers of the current WAN uplink.
DNS issue is fixed now in latest update. I’m on iOS so I had to install TestFlight UniFi app. Enable SSH and manually update the UTR and now everything works as expected.
Same. Been doing this for at least 5 years. I use unifi for everything except for the GLI.net travel router. With battery too. Good price point on this new unit from ubiquity though.
As someone who recently switched to iPhone from android (having been an iPhone user in the past until iPhone 6) it’s frustrating to see Apple omit such a basic feature as enabling a hotspot that shares the phone’s active internet connection - whether that internet connection be from cellular or from another WiFi network.
On android, it’s possible to make a WiFi hotspot that is routed to either your phone’s cellular or WiFi, depending on which is currently being used for internet access. I learned on a recent flight that iPhone doesn’t support this, which is disappointing.
Ideally, Apple would enable support for this, and there would be no need to go out of your way to spoof the MAC onto another device.
Personal hotspot had been an Apple feature for quite a while.
But it disables it when you're connected to a WiFi network 😂
Yes because you need technically 2nd wifi module. One for sending one for hotspot.
https://source.android.com/docs/core/connect/wifi-sta-ap-concurrency
Not true, if there is only one radio available a supported chip will split the time between STA and AP mode.
Yeah I think we’re both saying the same thing, just in slightly different ways. It looks like this bit of Claude’s brain-dump is the same as what you’re saying:
“The chip needs to either operate both on the same channel or rapidly switch between channels, which can impact performance.”
Overall my point is that Android supports this, and thanks to your link it looks like they have since Android 9, so for over 7 years. Apple could implement this, but chooses not to.
i just got my UTR and haven't had the opportunity to travel with it yet, but based on the reviews so far, i'm still packing my glinet for awhile. I've never thought to use a travel router while on the plane, since i usually just connect to the wifi with my android phone and the rest of the family piggybacks off the hotspot.
This. It blows my mind that people are making it more complicated. There are plenty of uses for a travel router but sharing one WiFi signup on a plane is stupid simple.
Not if you're an iOS family.... You can't reshare a WiFi connection on iOS, only android
It's really very stupid
Yikes, that's frustrating
Wait what
On iOS, as soon as you enable the personal hotspot, the hotspot broadcast takes over the WiFi chip, so it drops to cellular
Ah yes, correct
You have to have a Mac. iPhone connection -> usb tethered to Mac, Mac sharing via WiFI. Cumbersome.
Wow. TIL. That also blows my mind!
If you have T-Mobile, which includes free data access on flights, but only for devices with phone numbers (in other words, only phones, not laptops or tablets). This is a perfect use case for a travel router on a plane.
Most airlines are free wifi now. As long as you are a loyalty member, just hook up your device to WiFi. No router required.
Depends on who you fly and what the WiFi actually provides access to. AA gives you free WiFi to access their media library, but you have to pay to get out to the internet.
AA just started feee WiFi for all advantage members this month. It goes beyond their library.
Ah, great to hear! Thanks for the update
Are you spoofing your phone's mac address or did you just pay through a portal and it works?
He said from his “secondary device that he didn’t pay” to use WiFi on so I would assume he did it from his phone, the router copied its Mac and transmitted the allowed Mac internet service from the paid? Device to any other devices on the router WiFi that now share the same Mac.
You don’t have to do all that. Just make the router connect to the WiFi, connect phone to the travel router, and pay for access. The paid MAC address will be the router
So you’re saying if I spoof the Airline SSID, they connect to mine and pay for WiFi, I get free WiFi?
You don’t have to spoof anything. The travel router connects to the airline SSID, then you create your or WiFi network from that.
But to get someone else to connect to it and pay for my WiFi access, I would.
Connect travel router to hotel/airplane wifi.
Connect one or more client devices to travel router
Use any client device (currently on the travel router) to access the captive portal and login/pay
Done. All client devices are effectively paid now and all have Internet access through the travel router.
There is no need to mess with MAC addresses or clone anything.
This works because the travel router makes all your devices appear to the upstream connection as using the travel router's mac address. If you pay on your laptop, while connected through the travel router, then it is the travel router's mac that is recorded as paid. All your devices behind the travel router appear to have the travel router's MAC address, so they are all considered to have paid now.
It's a "router" with NAT so there's no copying MAC address or anything, beyond what NAT normally does.
The way that the plane's WiFi detects that there are multiple devices behind a single wifi client MAC is from the TTL of the packets. The TTL is supposed to be decremented by one for every hop it goes through. The packets coming from the router directly (like, the router trying to update it's firmware or something) will have a different TTL than all of the devices in its LAN.
The way you get around this restriction with these travel routers, is you just don't decrement the TTL. It's that easy. It's technically against the ethernet spec but whatever. This is what some phones will also do for their tethering/hotspot for their client devices, so your cellular provider doesn't know its tethering (many cellular providers have "unlimited" data but limit tethering to a few GB/month).
My assumption too but just curious. Can the unifi router spoof a mac address?
Yep, I think that’s the whole point of that device
I didn't have to spoof anything and it took some tinkering. It was not very intuitive as I did sign up with my phone first for wifi. Then after plugging this device in I had to then transfer the wifi to the device but once it was working the wifi was seamless. As far as spoofing the Mac, this is above my pay grade as I'm not even really sure how I got it working.
Its not really spoofing, per say. What's happening behind the scenes is that the travel router shows up as a single mac address for all the routed traffic behind it (all your devices with their own unique mac address). No spoofing is needed because unitedwifi only allows one device at a time once you've paid but lets to swap devices and disconnects the other one. So the router looks like that single device to united's gateway, via its mac.
Dunno how long that will be necessary as their starlink internet is now rolling out to the fleet.
Did you try paying for WiFi through the travel router first? I’m curious to see if that extra step of: “pay thru phone-> connect travel router first-> transfer WiFi to UTR” is really needed or if you can connect travel router and then pay directly through captive portal.
Either way this is my #1 use case so hoping to see more people report that it works.
Good assumption, but the router doesn’t support cloning MAC addresses.
It doesn't have to. It's a router, that's how it works. To the downstream systems, any device connecting through the router will have the routers IP and MAC.
Yes, it’s a TRAVEL router, where basic functionality is to clone your phones MAC address. Probably will come in a firmware update though.
Wrong, it’s has its own MAC address and that is the address of any connection routed through it
This was discussed previously in many other threads. Functionality is needed for MAC Address based WiFi purchases. Think “premium” plans in hotels that are tied to your device, cruise ships, airplanes too. While it’s fine if you make the purchase and then walk around with the travel router 24/7, it’s not good at all if you want to also be able to leave the travel router in your room as you go chill by the pool.
Oh and I forgot to mention one very obvious thing, the hotel/cruise whatever can see the MAC Address, and sometimes they do go through trouble of blocking non-end-user devices. So pretending to be an iPhone, a pixel or whatever is essential
The heck are you on about… mobile phones use private static or rotating per-network MAC addresses very commonly.
You can’t definitively tell from a MAC address what a device is.
The router cloning a MAC address of a connected device is total rubbish.
Interfaces have MAC addresses, the router is a NAT gateway for the phones connected to it, the router has its own MAC that the airline system sees.
Devices connected to the router won’t have their MAC addresses traversing the router and being seen by the airline system.
You can definitely tell what's on your network by Mac address.
You can tell there is something on your network, but if it’s a MAC starting 02 for example it could be anything. Or if it’s a bad actor, it could be cloning a MAC to for example look like a SIP phone. I said you can’t “definitively” tell.
Phones having random MAC addresses still keep the device identifier, for the most part anyway. Hence my examples, that are still valid and used by people.
I don’t understand the aggressiveness, the feature exists on every travel router out there except UTR, which will likely have this feature in the future. Why be so against it?
What you determine as “basic functionality” is a niche function that maybe 1% of people use. Nothing against adding a feature but insinuating it’s practically useless without it is ridiculous.
Does onboard Wi-Fi even filter by MAC? I thought not for 2 reasons.. Apple devices by default will provide randomized addresses (interesting chance of losing your connection after paying) and I thought generally you could get Wi-Fi by spoofing a paid ip address?
It’s randomized per AP not just randomized every time you connect to something.
The idea is you connect the UTR to the paid WiFi, through the Unifi Network app and that will forward the portal to your phone. Just pay/login as you would normally, and the UTR proxies the request but with its own device data.
Curious question, how do you power it? From your laptop or a power bank?
I actually plugged the usb c directly into my phone and the phone powered it. Did it eat my battery? Yes. Was it worth it? Also yes. Had the power bank ready to charge me back up as soon as I got off the plane.
Easy solution
What about a USB-A to USB-C and use the planes DC?
I'm sure that would work, it just needs usb c so I'm sure any source would power it.
Most airlines prohibit the use of power banks during flight. So I am wondering this too.
I never had a problem with a power bank. It's power banks up to a certain capacity afaik
No, it actually depends on the quality of the cells. Anyways, good that the use is banned, because if one would fail, it becomes a real threat.
What's the difference between a laptop battery, a phone battery and a power bank? I just checked Lufthansa and they allow power banks. You are not allowed to have them in checked bags which makes sense. But normal sized power banks absolutely are allowed on most flights
I would say it’s easier to get a crap power bank than a defective phone/laptop battery. Check out the recent fire incident in flight, they most likely come from power banks not phone or laptop.
While a normal sized power bank is always allowed in cabin, some airlines ask you to not put them in the overhead bin or to not use them in-flight.
Airlines are just creating rules to avoid incidents.
Phone and laptop batteries usually are by decent size companies with quality control. Many power banks are off-brand with unknown quality batteries and protection.
KLM have started prohibiting the use of all power banks during flight now. They mention it on all flights now. The same applies to most airlines I’ve been on in the past few months Singapore, Ryanair, aer lingus, air Asia etc
[deleted]
Both Qantas and Virgin Australia have banned the use of power banks on their flights (eg. pretty much any domestic flight in Australia)
The charging of power banks are not allowed on Lufthansa flights. Needed to check again for this, since I got this wrong in my head. But the complete use of power banks are banned on certain airlines anyways. Take Pegasus for example.
Common misconception. The only restriction for power banks on flights is you can’t leave them in your checked baggage, they are only allowed in your carry-on or personal item. (In the US, at least)
Not true at all. Virgin Australia has implemented new restrictions on power banks effective from December 1, 2025, prohibiting their use during flights. You can bring em in the cabin, but can't plug them in.
OK that’s Virgin Australia, what else
(In the US, at least) - no edit
I've never heard this one. Although almost all flights have some kind of charging possibilities.
? Most airlines do not prohibit power banks on flights. What they do prohibit is putting lithium ion batteries in your checked luggage. That includes powerbanks but also any Li-Ion rechargeable device. If a fire starts in the cargo hold... we'll just look at UPS Flight 6 back in 2010 out of Dubai 😢.
just do it anyways
I struggle to see the benefit of using this over a phone in personal hot spot mode.
One more device and one more mobile carrier to pay.
Dude change the SSID before you get us noticed and banned! 😓 😭
(Yes I know they can block vendor MACs but the key is to go under the radar 😓)
Good call didn't even think of this
Haha good point. It's not the most subtle 😅
My phone does this too...
noice
It's an excellent product for some cases; for travel, it meets my needs. Are there other products with more features? Yes, but this is just convenient and easy to use.
Nice
ypu remove wifi connection on phone, connect again and you get new time. mac will be randomized, it will look like a new device
Does it work if I don’t have a Ubiquiti network in my home? Would it work just as an independent device for travel?
Yes I never sent the VPN back home I just projected the connected wifi out
Did the same recently but with my phone, paid the £18.99 full flight data and shared it with the whole family, worked wonderfully, was getting 70+ Mb across the Atlantic.
Literally the first thing my wife said when I explained what my new toy was.
Ehhh. I can do this with my Android phone.
I give it a few months before airlines find a way to ban them.
I wonder if as more people do this, what the RF environment in the plane will look like. Would it interfere with the plane’s WiFi performance or the aircraft itself at some point?
The answer is of course, "yes."
Weird flex
I can do this from my windows device or android and I didn't have to buy a brand new router to do it
how?
On Android you just turn on your hotspot while connected to Wi-Fi and any clients that connect to your hotspot will get shared through the Wi-Fi network to which your phone is connected.
Ironic that you said weird flex, but also had your own, even weirder, flex.
Maybe the first statement was intended as a lead in to the rest of their comment. Like “here’s a weird flex:”
Love it! These on-board services typically only allow a single device to be logged in at any point in time. Smart idea to share a single plane Wi-Fi login with multiple devices, i.e. whole family! You could probably power it from the plane usb ‘charger’ slot.
Yeah i actually used my phone because I didn't feel like digging our a longer cable. The one it comes with is usb c to usb c and is only one foot long so it was small and easy to carry
I have a ZyXEL Wireless N 3-in-1 Travel Router, 2inx2.5in. Haven’t pulled it out in a while, no use/need it.
Y'all. Just tether your phone after paying for Wi-Fi. It's really not that hard.
Which is not possible on iOS
You can't reshare a WiFi connection with iOS
Yeah this one feature is one of the biggest things that will keep me on android, just join wifi, press hotspot button, boom wifi7 router.
[deleted]
Well, with iOS you can’t share if your only connection is WiFi. You can only share cellular so then that’s not going to work if you’re in a flight
Like many other missing features making iOS unusable.
What a great reason to not buy an Apple device. How did they miss another super basic feature the rest of us have had for a decade?
I find that modern Android phones can do Bluetooth tethering and hotspot (while connected to wifi). So there's never a need for me to use travel router (which can do this since ages and cost like 20$).
I don't know exactly which devices can do this, but certainly on modern Samsung phones you don't need to do bluetooth tethering (which is quite slow). You can just do wifi-to-wifi hotspot, just like a travel router.
The option to enable this is a bit hidden though. On Samsung phones:
Go to hotspot settings and tap on the network name. Scroll down and tap on advanced. Scroll down and find "wifi sharing" and turn it on. Once you have flipped that setting to on, the wifi upstream connection will stop turning off when you enable hotspot mode. Enabling hotspot will simply share the current Internet connection, whatever it happens to be.
For me, this has replaced the majority of my need for a travel router. However, sometimes I still set the travel router up just so my laptop stays on the Internet when I leave the room with my phone. That way it can keep working on big downloads or whatever while I'm gone.
How does this device work? You just plug in a Sim card with data plan from the service provider?