dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
168628
share rss forum feed


Huligan

@mpowercom.net

Best Dual Wan Router

I have a small business with 15 PC's. I also have 2 modems coming in from Comcast. I currently have 2 separate networks within one roof.

I want to combine them with a dual wan port router but can't figure out what to use!

Every single one I looked at has bad reviews!

What can you recommend? Here's what i saw:

LINKSYS RV042
XINCOM XC-DPG502
EDIMAX BR-624
D-Link DI-LB604


Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:5
Do you have an option for using a separate provider??
In other words, there is no redundancy with the same ISP.
If you need more throughput simply pay for me thru the single connection.


Huligan

@mpowercom.net
reply to Huligan
Anav,

I don't need 2 ISP's. My problem is the download speeds.
We move allot of data down and I need 2 just for speed.

Comcast has been down once in the last 2 years, so it's not a problem.

I need a Router with DHCP and no problems. It's only use will be to combine the 2 modems.


Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:5
Well thats what I am saying, simply increase the speed throughput of a single pipe?? Does comcast or a diff internet provider in your area have diff classes of business speed/throughput they sell??


Huligan

@mpowercom.net
reply to Huligan
We have the highest tier Comcast offers.

I need advise on the best dual Wan Router.

fox7

join:2001-02-12
Culver City, CA
A dual WAN Router is NOT going to add those 2 pipes into 1 pipe. It is for fail over. If one connection goes down the other one will automatically pick up the job.

fox7


Huligan

@mpowercom.net
reply to Huligan
I don't need to have 1 pipe.

I need to combine 2 Modems to be on the same network.
For this I need a 2 Wan port Router. the way I'm going to set it up will be Person A will be on Modem 1 and Person B will be on Modem 2 for load balancing.

Currently we have 2 separate networks and resources can't be shared from one to another.

I think I'm going with XinCom XC-DPG502


toby
Troy Mcclure

join:2001-11-13
Portland, OR

1 edit
Xincom told me that their dual wan router will work with the same ISP subnet. I haven't heard back from Zyxel yet.
The Xincom also looks to work well with secure connections, the other routers require configurations.

I have read that the Linksys routers need a different subnet for each isp, so it wouldn't work in your case using the same ISP for both. The Dlink hasn't got good reviews for stability.


DaSneaky1D
what's up
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
reply to Huligan
Would you be willing to use a PC based firewall that has multi-WAN capabilities?
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::

jordantbro
Premium
join:2005-11-02
Salt Lake City, UT

1 edit
reply to Huligan
Have you seen any products from Hotbrick?

»www.hotbrick.com/produto.asp?tip ··· odPro=22
--
Jordan


toby
Troy Mcclure

join:2001-11-13
Portland, OR
said by jordantbro:

Have you seen any products from Hotbrick?

»www.hotbrick.com/produto.asp?tip ··· odPro=22
Looks like that Hotbrick LB-2 is actually a XinCom XC-DPG502.


luma
Premium
join:2004-08-17
Port Coquitlam, BC

1 edit
reply to Huligan
I have a Netgear FVS124G that I use for load balancing.

When I download let's say 4 files, 2 will go down one model while the other 2 goes down the other modem.

It is a hunk of junk!

The WAN is limited to 11mbps combined (Currently I have 2x 8megabit connections so I am wasting 5 mbps)

I am on the third replacement, First one kept on dropping WAN 2, second one and third one had LAN ports just die (yes I tested)

so stay away from the Netgear FVS124G

my next one will be the Zywall 35 I think it is, has dual wan and a lot more power (but is 500bucks +)

Luma

Freezone

join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI
Dual wan routers will add total bandwidth to your organization.

You do not need a dual wan router in order to combine the 2 networks. BUt if you want dhcp then it is suggested.

You get what you pay for in dual wan router land. The cheap ones suck.

If you wee willing to give up dhcp then all you would have to do is add the gateways to each cable modem to all of you pcs. Windows will handle failover. This is provided that the cable modem will allow you to change its ip.

Also if you are looking for a software solution to try while you look for a hardware router, let me suggest pfsense running in a vmware session.

Even though your cable is rarely down there are times when the backbone goes down and sites get caught in a black hole and become unreachable. 2 providers helps insure against this. Even maintenance can be nerve racking.

daveinpoway
Premium
join:2006-07-03
Poway, CA
kudos:3
reply to luma
Have you considered the Netgear FVX538? In the past, this model didn't have the best reputation, due to less-than-perfect firmware, but the current firmware seems to be pretty good. Like the Zywall 35, this costs around $500, but cheap routers just don't do a good job (I learned that earlier this year, when I tried several models before deciding to buy the 538). You also get a lifetime guaranty.

ple

join:2002-11-09
New York, NY
check out www.peplink.com

supports failover and combining bandwidth/load balancing


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
reply to fox7
said by fox7:

A dual WAN Router is NOT going to add those 2 pipes into 1 pipe. It is for fail over. If one connection goes down the other one will automatically pick up the job.

fox7
I have a dual wan router and it is great for load balancing the connections. If one connection is throttled, it routes the other downloads to the other connection. Same goes for upload bandwidth.

I have a RV082 which works great. I would highly recommend that to be honest. However, any router you buy at that price is going to be pretty good as long as it is a brand name.


dervari2

join:2000-01-17
Atlanta, GA
reply to Huligan
If you really want a more commercial oriented solution then SOHO/Consumer, take a look at some of the Radware boxes.


Mark
Premium
join:2001-11-15
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:1
reply to Huligan
I would use three NICs in a Linux box and a 16 port gigE switch.


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
said by Mark:

I would use three NICs in a Linux box and a 16 port gigE switch.
If you know Linux, thats a great solution. I know linux pretty well, and I opted for a dual wan router for a number of reasons. Main one is ease of use. Then you have the noise factor and power consumption to consider. I know these pale in comparison to the price of Linux, but to me, they do count. You can get the job done right with both though, thats for sure.


SterlingJ85

join:2000-11-19
Voorhees, NJ
reply to Huligan
I have had HotBrick's in the past, they don't work that great.

I moved over the PePLink devices, now on an enterprise Balance model. Have had great success, and the device is AWESOME. Perfect stability, and fails-over and balances load very well.

More expensive, but well worth it!


Leathal
Premium
join:2002-02-09
canada
kudos:2
reply to Huligan
You are missing the point of what Anav is getting across, what happens if Comcast blow a router that connects them to their upstream and their redundant system can't handle the extra load are you really safe? It's always best practice when you are going for a dual WAN setup no matter what it's for to use two different ISP's that way if one has technically problems your second one can pickup the load.

Putting eggs all in one basket because you haven't had any problems in the past 2 years is simply mental!

As for dual WAN I would suggest the Xincom, Linksys and Dlink, and I am not sure about the Edimax do not lock the sessions into their WAN ports when you are network load balancing which can be a serious issue when it comes to accessing sites that use HTTPS (SSL Certs) as almost all of the them don't allow you two come in two separate IP addresses.

Leathal


insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
reply to Huligan
I reviewed every dual wan I could find on the internet in my internship over the summer. Based on online reviews and features, a draytek vigor2910 seemed like a really good router. »www.draytek.com/product/Dual_Wan ··· 2910.php
Definitely do not go with a hotbrick(My fraternity used one and after 3 years it still doesn't handle arp correctly), and from what I read xincom had next to no customer support. Other than the draytek I think the d-link and the linksys were the other two I felt would have been decent and also had acceptable customer support, but the linksys was hit or miss on hardware problems.


pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
I have just read the specs on the Draytek 2910 VG router. Sure reads nice, it looks like it does everything except take out the trash.

Has anyone used one of these and have any up close and personal stories?

Tim
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.


toby
Troy Mcclure

join:2001-11-13
Portland, OR
reply to Huligan
I couldn't find any reviews about the Draytek 2910, some on usenet liked their products though.


pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast

2 edits
reply to Huligan
If all you want is load balancing and do not care about fail over, then you do not need a dual wan router.

Lets say you want 8 machines on Connection A and 7 machines on connection B.

Assume that Connection A has a LAN address of 192.168.1.1 and connection B has a LAN of 192.168.1.2.

Go to TCP/IP properties on the client machines and set up PC 1-8 to use 192.168.1.1 as it's gateway and PC 9-15 to use 192.168.1.2 as it's gateway.

Since you are manually setting TCP/IP properties, you will also have to manually assign each PC a static TCP/IP address in the 192.168.1.3->192.168.1.18 range and well as a DNS server. (Most modems let you specify the modem as the DNS server) If this function works on your modems you could use 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 as primary and secondary DNS servers. Other wise manually assign the DNS your ISP provides or use something like 4.2.2.X

If you are running a server on the network, you can assign all this using the DHCP service and assigning configurations by MAC address.
This will not give you fail over or true load balancing but it does work to balance the load between 2 connections and will allow you to share files between PCs.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.


margioa
Premium
join:2007-04-06
Nicaragua
Reviews:
·deltathree
reply to Huligan
My recommendation for you is to use the Zywall 35 for Duo WAN administration(load balancing).

»www.zywall.com/web/product_famil ··· 725A2764

Regards,
Margio


insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
reply to pende_tim
I was on the tail end of an internship, so I was only able to play with it for a week. In my limited testing, I found no issues. Load balancing and fail-over seemed to work well.


pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ
kudos:1
Did fail-back also work well?

Freezone

join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI
reply to pende_tim
Not as elegant a solution as true load balancing which will allow for one machine to use all available bandwidth. Also failover is easy to add to that setup by simply adding the second gateways with a higher metric. To get around dns issues just use opendns.com


lingyun

@hinet.net
reply to Huligan
I suggest you Netwalker Agile F-500
I like it because of its high performance but cheaper price. It also has other models with VPN and inbound load balance feature.

»www.netwalker.com.tw/product_lis ··· view.htm