said by 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
You bowed out of this discussion rather early and never seemed to get a good answer to your question. I wonder if you got the XinCom and how it works for you. If I understand your situation, I don't know why you'd need a dual WAN router, though. It appears you just wanted a way to combine networks and have users manually load-balanced, that is, manually assigned different gateway addresses to achieve load balance. For that, you don't need a router, the Comcast business cable modems can be assigned IPs on your network's subnet, and that would work fine. However, it is advisable to get a multi-wan router so that you can then have one pipe to run through a firewall to separate your internal network from the wild wild web.
In any case, this thread contributed to my own evaluation process for upgrading my school's internet (currently have 2 T1s, will be dropping one), and I just added two Comcast business cable modems and am waiting for my new Peplink Balance 380 enterprise multi-wan load-balancing router (»
www.peplink.com/products ··· ance-380 ). Lots of research contributed to that decision, and though that particular router is $2000, my boss, the president and principal of the school would have signed off on a $6,000 Cisco router and a three year commitment to three new T1s that our ISP proposed. I didn't think that 4.5 Mb/s was going to address the bandwidth needs of the YouTube generation, so I recommended a different direction.
So we're keeping one T1 as our lifeline and they just installed the business class Comcast modems. We're paying for 8 Mb/s download and 1 Mb/s upload, but multiple tests over multiple days on speedtest.net showed *20* to *22* Mb/s download on each one every time. In our local area, most cable modems are residential, so they don't have much activity during the day, when we need the bandwidth.
A three year comparison of going the Cisco with multiple T1 route vs. going this way and replacing the T1 with DSL modem when the T1 contract runs out in 19 months, the cost savings was $40,000 over three years. I'd say that's worth the risk...
So I'll report back when I get the Peplink installed. Huligan, if you're still around, let us know how the XinCom worked out for you.
[edited- link to Peplink Balance 380 fixed]