• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 99
  • Last Modified:

SMB Routers with GB WAN

I had a great oh-duh moment this morning. Comcast upgraded my internet to 100Mbps download and I couldn't figure out for the life of me why it wouldn't speedtest higher than 100Mbps. Oh duh. The WAN port on the router (Cisco RV110W) is only 10/100. So I started looking for a SMB router with a GB WAN Port and their aren't many. The reviews on the RV line is horrid. Are there any Home/SMB routers out there that do GB on the WAN port that someone would recommend? Something that doesn't break the bank?
0
LockDown32
Asked:
LockDown32
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • +1
8 Solutions
 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
The whole RV line, as mentioned in my question, gets really bad reviews: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=RV320K9NA&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Here is yet a cheaper one but the reviews aren't much better: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833150477&cm_re=RV130W-_-33-150-477-_-Product

Really bad reviews
0
 
Jackie ManCommented:
Is VPN and dual WAN crucial?

If not, you can go for TP-Link Archer C2 AC750 which has GB WAN.
0
Never miss a deadline with monday.com

The revolutionary project management tool is here!   Plan visually with a single glance and make sure your projects get done.

 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
In this particular case neither. I never gave it a lot of thought but internet speeds by different providers are crossing the 100Mbps barrier. This is going to be more and more common.
0
 
nociSoftware EngineerCommented:
Turris Omnia? (based on upgradable open source sw.)

https://omnia.turris.cz/en/
0
 
SIM50Commented:
Are there any Home/SMB routers out there that do GB on the WAN port that someone would recommend?

It's not about the interface speed, it's all about backplane throughput. You can have 1Gbps interfaces but if the backplane can support only 100Mbps, you will be limited to 100Mbps regardless of what your interface speed is.

I don't think there is an SMB router that can truly support 1Gbps. Even the last model of Cisco branch routers, 3945, doesn't support 1Gbps but comes close. For 1Gbps and higher, you need to get either ASR or 7200 series which are obviously not SMB.

I would suggest to take a look at Cisco ASA 5506-X. It has 1Gbps interfaces and high throughput. Plus you get all the benefits of the real firewall. You can also look into 5506W-X if you need built in wifi. The cost is probably over your current budget but you are not looking to replace for at least the next five years and it will be a good investment.
0
 
Jackie ManCommented:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com

My practice is to dig around and compare performance  benchment for different routers from the website above before I make a purchase decision.
0
 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
@SIM50 it is a mixed bag. You really have two barriers. First is the physical connection speed of the port. It is either 10/100/1000 and if the WAN port is only physically capable of doing 100Mbps then that is your bottleneck. The next step up from 100 is 1000. So I am just assuming that you have to start with a GB WAN port because if you start with a 100Mbps WAN port you will never go faster then that because of the limitation of the port itself.

Then.... (after you find a router with a GB WAN Port) you get in to processing power of the router itself. Is this what you are referring to as "backplane speed"? If the router doesn't have enough processing power you could have a GB WAN Port but the router itself isn't capable of processing higher then 100Mbps to the router itself is the bottleneck.

I know on some Routers that do UTM that you have to look at a spec called "Stateful Throughput" because your buttleneck is the processing power and not the WAN Port speed.

Am I looking at this wrong?
0
 
SIM50Commented:
You are right about the interface speed. If the interface is limited to 100Mbps, it will never go over that speed. A lot of people think that interface speed is what dictates the routers throughput thus my explanation.

Then.... (after you find a router with a GB WAN Port) you get in to processing power of the router itself. Is this what you are referring to as "backplane speed"? If the router doesn't have enough processing power you could have a GB WAN Port but the router itself isn't capable of processing higher then 100Mbps to the router itself is the bottleneck.

Backplane is usually used to reference the hardware circuit. But there are two ways the routing is done - in software and hardware. If you take a look at SMB routers which most of the time have one CPU and a cheap circuit, they do routing in software without any hardware assistance. So for them, the backplane would actually mean the CPU power. If you start moving up in the router lines (SMB->900->1900->etc), the functions done by CPU are being off loaded to specifically designed hardware. The more functions are done in the hardware, the better throughput is. For example, in ASR series almost everything is done by hardware. In this case, the backplane is used to reference the hardware.

I know on some Routers that do UTM that you have to look at a spec called "Stateful Throughput" because your buttleneck is the processing power and not the WAN Port speed.

Yes because besides switching packets, a router has to do certain actions to the packets. Like in the case with "statefull throughput", it tracks flags, ports, dest ip, src ip for each packet. If you add protocol normalization, it would also have to check all packets to be compliant with the applicable RFC's. The more services you turn on, the less your throughput will be.
0
 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
So that kind of leaves me back to the original question :) The WAN Port Speed has to be GB. What spec would say that the router can process info that fast? I heard on SonicWall's it was called "Stateful Throughput"?

I have been using a little Cisco RV110W and the bottleneck is the WAN Port Speed (100Mbps). As mentioned above the reviews for the whole RV Series is pretty poor until you look at the revies for TP-Link, Netgear and D-Link. None of them are stellar.

Finding the WAN Port Speed is pretty easy. SO how can I tell if the router can process fast enough?
0
 
SIM50Commented:
I don't work in SMB environment so I don't have a direct experience with the router line. I worked plenty with lower end ASAs though and they have a stellar performance and good life expectancy.

I would suggest to take a look at Cisco ASA 5506-X. It has 1Gbps interfaces and high throughput. Plus you get all the benefits of the real firewall. You can also look into 5506W-X if you need built in wifi. The cost is probably over your current budget but you are not looking to replace for at least the next five years and it will be a good investment.
0
 
Jackie ManCommented:
There is a benckmark called WAN to LAN throughput and you can go to my suggested website in my previous comment for details.
0

Featured Post

Receive 1:1 tech help

Solve your biggest tech problems alongside global tech experts with 1:1 help.

  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • +1
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now