| |
to EdT
Re: affordable router to handle 150/10?Well 85/month is easy enough to budget in if you;ve cut the cord but a 200+ dollar router purchase can be painful P:) ontop of a cable modem and Install fees etc. |
|
2 edits |
said by morisato:Well 85/month is easy enough to budget in if you;ve cut the cord but a 200+ dollar router purchase can be painful P:) ontop of a cable modem and Install fees etc.
If you are going with the 150/10 then there is no point in cheaping out on the router because the WNDR3700 is no good if you want to run QoS, run QoS and the max speed you'll get is 80mbps; run OpenVPN and max you'll get is 10mbps. Its your call...but if you are going for 150/10 you'd better build a pfsense machine with enough horse power. Edit: Here is what I'm talking about. I've got two OpenVPN connections, one for my torrent server and one for all other traffic. With my torrent server completely saturating my uplink I can still do a speed test and get full speed out my second VPN (private internet access); this is QoS in action at deprioritizing my torrent server. There is no consumer grade router than can handle two OpenVPN connections simultaneously and still have the following speeds. Mind you that all the encrypting and decrypting for both VPNs are being done by my pfsense machine yet it can still handle QoS without giving me an attitude. (All this is on Rogers 150/10 with SB6141) 
|
|
 EdT
join:2009-06-12
Saint-Laurent, QC |
to morisato
I just finished chatting with some friends oversea about their internet connections. I think I flipped on what they are paying and getting.
Hong-Kong and China = 100Mbps/100Mbps cable internet $23cad !!!
Gave him the link to SpeedGuide.net thinking he was mistaken, dam was I ever mistaken, they thought that was the norm and pretty slow ! ...LoL |
|
| |
said by EdT:I just finished chatting with some friends oversea about their internet connections. I think I flipped on what they are paying and getting.
Hong-Kong and China = 100Mbps/100Mbps cable internet $23cad !!!
Gave him the link to SpeedGuide.net thinking he was mistaken, dam was I ever mistaken ! ...LoL
Did you ask them what kind of router they were using?  |
|
EdT
join:2009-06-12
Saint-Laurent, QC
1 edit |
EdT
Member
2013-Apr-3 2:48 pm
I did, he didn't know, he wasn't the techie type, but he said it was a cable modem and not DSL. I will ask him again the next time he is online. » www.speedtest.net/result ··· 6799.png |
|
mlord
join:2006-11-05
Kanata, ON |
to technocar2
said by technocar2:With my torrent server completely saturating my uplink I can still do a speed test and get full speed out my second VPN (private internet access); this is QoS in action at deprioritizing my torrent server. Speed tests for PIA are more than a bit misleading: PIA uses compression on the VPN pipe, and the speedtest.net test data compresses rather nicely, resulting in somewhat unrealistic reported numbers. It's quite possible that the second VPN was only getting half the bandwidth there. |
|
1 edit |
said by mlord:Speed tests for PIA are more than a bit misleading: PIA uses compression on the VPN pipe, and the speedtest.net test data compresses rather nicely, resulting in somewhat unrealistic reported numbers. It's quite possible that the second VPN was only getting half the bandwidth there.
I know what you are talking about; basically you are saying I only downloading half the "data" but its compressed; and once its uncompressed it doubles in size thus showing inflated speeds. I have heard that argument a million times on these forum, and I'm not buying it because the pfsense WAN graph shows the real speed and it shows ~150mbps on the WAN interface graphs when my VPN connection is saturated on downlink so if it was compressed as much as you say it is then it would show that much less on the WAN interface graph and much higher on the VPN interface graphs. But the graphs are similar regardless of what you think (~150mbps on WAN interface graph and ~140mbps on the VPN interface graph). Until these numbers start being wacky; I'm not going to believe your argument. Mate if what you say were the case then the WAN interface should show 70mbps and VPN interfaces should show 140mbps but that is not the case. |
|
| technocar2 |
to EdT
Correct me if I'm wrong but that speed test's ping is too low and upload is too high, that can only mean its FTTH. He probably thinks its docsis but he actually has FTTH otherwise his upload won't be that high. |
|
| |
I am pretty sure it can handle qos and 150/10 i am running ddwrt on it and it seems to be okay so far, also i don;t torrent, so i don;t need it to handle thousands of micro connections like you might. and i had a pfsense box no thanks, if i go that route though i would pick up a raspberry pi. |
|
s0dhi
join:2011-08-02
Brampton, ON
1 edit |
s0dhi
Member
2013-Apr-3 9:33 pm
said by morisato:I am pretty sure it can handle qos and 150/10 i am running ddwrt on it and it seems to be okay so far, also i don;t torrent, so i don;t need it to handle thousands of micro connections like you might. and i had a pfsense box no thanks, if i go that route though i would pick up a raspberry pi.
Raspberry PI only has a single NIC and IIRC, the NIC is 10/100. I don't quite understand the statement "i had a pfsense box no thanks". What did you not like about it? EDIT: Also the RaspberryPi NIC performance is severely limited by being connected to the USB bus. |
|
| |
to morisato
said by morisato:I am pretty sure it can handle qos and 150/10 i am running ddwrt on it and it seems to be okay so far, also i don;t torrent, so i don;t need it to handle thousands of micro connections like you might. and i had a pfsense box no thanks, if i go that route though i would pick up a raspberry pi.
The way dd-wrt works is if you even just turn on QoS it will dip your speed to whatever your CPU can support regardless of how many connections you have or how many policies you have, max I got was ~100mbps with QoS with just one computer and zero policy but the average was about 80mbps with 4 computers and 10 policies, if you don't believe me then don't. You can try it for yourself and then I'll say I told you so. |
|
technocar2
1 recommendation |
to s0dhi
said by s0dhi:I don't quite understand the statement "i had a pfsense box no thanks". What did you not like about it?
I think the complicatedness and the learning curve turns people away from pfsense. But once you get past it you start seeing the beauty that pfsense is. Its not for everyone I suppose. |
|
s0dhi
join:2011-08-02
Brampton, ON |
s0dhi
Member
2013-Apr-3 9:41 pm
said by technocar2:said by s0dhi:I don't quite understand the statement "i had a pfsense box no thanks". What did you not like about it?
I think the complicatedness and the learning curve turns people away from pfsense. But once you get past it you start seeing the beauty that pfsense is. Its not for everyone I suppose. You do have a point there. I can't remember the early days of my cut-over from Tomato/DD-WRT to pfsense, but having stuck with it, I'm content (especially with the VPN and DNS poisoning). |
|
