Best available Router 2011

[slylittlefox]

Well for a start it works out of the box, anything that has to have third party firmware installed is a no go, either it works from the manufacturer or it's not happening. If you want to spend time installing third party stuff that's your prerogative, I don't have the time or inclination to do it for my own stuff and there's no way I'm going to talk others through it.

The process is: download the firmware, upload the firmware through the existing web interface, reboot. Why put that obstacle in the way when it's literally 2 mins to do?

And do you never update IOS?

They're massively reliable, look up the MTBF for even low end Cisco and Juniper compared to the consumer stuff (where most of the time they won't even quote it).

That I can't argue with, but again, if you buy smart, you can still have an extremely capable and equally as reliable router for ~£50.

Features for another. That is reliable, standards compliant features that work properly and sanely as a network engineer might expect them to. I'm looking at every consumer router and IPv6 for a starting point.

DDWRT on a competent router would offer all, if not vastly more, features than any consumer out-of-the-box job, and indeed would rival some low end enterprise kit:

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/What_is_"DD-WRT"?#Features

Added to that, performance, a great many consumer routers won't process 40Mbps at line speed even a moderately challenging traffic profile. The third party firmware is usually worse here because it enforces routing in software which isn't particularly well written for efficiency.

Again, I'll concede somewhat on this, it's definitely worth considering. But again, the risk can be alleviated by buying smart and doing your research - the WRT54G handles both 22Mbps ADSL and 50Mbps Cable without issue or complaint.

The airport extreme in my view is a good device, I wouldn't use it as a router but it's a superior wireless access point to any other device in it's price range I'm aware of, it's well built and has some enterprise level features (syslog, SNMP etc) that are usually missing.

This I definitely won't agree with. I know I'm beginning to sound like a DDWRT fanboi (to compete with your Cisco fanboism ) - but offering syslog and SNMP is hardly anything to write home about. Those sort of features are bog standard even on consumer routers ime!

More than anything though, it's wireless is bullet proof in my experience.

Whilst I can't argue with the fact that it's wireless is reliable, I take issue with the fact that you're paying a big premium for the brand name - devices that perform the same or better can be had for less, the Apple isn't using high end premium kit inside.

It's missing web interface is a concern but the GUI is exceptionally good on the other hand (better than any web UI I recall actually).

It's more than a concern - it's shocking!! Of course the thick client may be better than a web GUI, but it's hardly a fair comparison - and ultimately it means that the GUI has to be installed just to configure the thing.

Anyway, good geek off

 

[benftl]

As for an actual recommendation, I'd go for a Cisco/Linksys WRT610n, which can be had for around £50 second hand, and install DDWRT.

Oh yes, and I agree with pretty much everything else you've said. A <£100 router with DD-WRT is so far from 'rubbish' it's laughable tbh.

 

[MagicBoy]

zoomee - bear in mind that it's in breach of the Sky T&Cs to connection equipment not supplied by them. My Sky router failed a while back so I borrowed a DrayTek 2820 from work which just about worked. Sync was 3MB slower than the Sky router and the connection kept resetting itself every couple of hours.

I'm now using the replacement Sky router (after Parcel Farce eventually found it) with the computers connected to an HP Gigabit switch which works well.

BRS - Just curious as to why you believe the vast majority of consumer level routers are trash?

 

[benftl]

Because he's controversial. He even admits to not using any consumer grade routers 'for years' and then proceeds to **** them off anyway. My DIR615 is the nuts ffs

 

[MagicBoy]

Because he's controversial. He even admits to not using any consumer grade routers 'for years' and then proceeds to **** them off anyway. My DIR615 is the nuts ffs

Thanks, but that's not what I asked. I've had experience of the aforementioned D-Link and it was ... troublesome.

 

[benftl]

It's easy enough to get the proper answer to your question if you read through his posts in this thread, I just provided a summary

What was troublesome with your 615? It isn't the best router out there but it's not bad at all for the price. Bear in mind I flashed it with DD-WRT.

 

[MagicBoy]

To be fair the posts of interest appeared in the time I was composing the question. I shall go an peruse them after I've finished watching Top Gear.

It wasn't my 615, belonged to a friend who was supplied it by the ISP when he got a speed bump. Took two replacements and four visits to get the damn thing working. I wasn't about to flash it with DD-WRT. We've also had some users at work who use them for homeworking reporting issues. Swap it for a Linksys or Draytek and the problems disappear.

 

[deano]

I borrowed a DrayTek 2820 from work which just about worked. Sync was 3MB slower than the Sky router and the connection kept resetting itself every couple of hours.

thats because draytek's use really bad chipsets so they can't sync as fast as a broadcom chipset based router.

I use a billion 7800 and sync higher than the sky one no issues with disconnection's.

 

[benftl]

To be fair the posts of interest appeared in the time I was composing the question. I shall go an peruse them after I've finished watching Top Gear.

It wasn't my 615, belonged to a friend who was supplied it by the ISP when he got a speed bump. Took two replacements and four visits to get the damn thing working. I wasn't about to flash it with DD-WRT. We've also had some users at work who use them for homeworking reporting issues. Swap it for a Linksys or Draytek and the problems disappear.

They're pretty bad with VM firmware, which I'm assuming were the ones your friend had as VM are the only ISP who were supplying them.

DD-WRT transforms router performance, I've no complaints about mine. I wonder why flashing the firmware wasn't an option you'd consider, surely it would have been a lot less troublesome and time consuming compared to multiple swap outs? In any case you could have just flashed back to standard firmware should DD-WRT not have solved the issues, avoiding any VM/warranty issues.

You still don't explain what the issues were or what was 'troublesome' with them?

 

[MagicBoy]

Indeed it was VM. I'm not sticking DD-WRT on something that doesn't belong to me, is under warranty from the ISP and that I'm not intimately familiar with.

This isn't a bash D-Link thread so I won't take it further off topic.

 

[bigredshark]

The process is: download the firmware, upload the firmware through the existing web interface, reboot. Why put that obstacle in the way when it's literally 2 mins to do?

And do you never update IOS?

OK, it's maybe a trivial objection but it's still something, to have to install firmware completely different to what the device comes with is troubling to me. I shouldn't have to do that. I update JUNOS (I'm actually a Juniper fanboy when it comes down to it, Cisco have a place but aren't the best by a stretch) Because it's unnecessary, an extra step to completely change the device from it's stock firmware. Doesn't sit well. I don't want to be hacking a device before I can use it.

DDWRT on a competent router would offer all, if not vastly more, features than any consumer out-of-the-box job, and indeed would rival some low end enterprise kit:

I'd disagree, yes it offers more than the usual consumer routers, which offer basically nothing. But meaningful and useful IPv6 support is still missing to my knowledge, let alone the fancier features (prefix delegation etc). That would be faintly criminal if it weren't for the complete inability of any consumer manufacturer to build it either.

Or you could explore the stupidly basic port forwarding options (err, can I just have the MIP, VIP, DIP or equivalent options that a proper firewall has please?). Or how about some PBR? No? Oh well. That would actually be useful too for those with more than 1 home connection. Or a *working* ALG would be a helpful feature too.

Again, I'll concede somewhat on this, it's definitely worth considering. But again, the risk can be alleviated by buying smart and doing your research - the WRT54G handles both 22Mbps ADSL and 50Mbps Cable without issue or complaint.

Again I'd disagree I think, for even middle of the road traffic profiles it's hard work for a router, a Cisco 1841 with CEF enabled can only just do 50Mbps, given these devices don't benefit from CEF you're going to need a serious processor to do the same. I don't imagine any of the current chips in these devices are faster on that traffic profile. It might do 50Mbps downloading from newsgroups with 10 simultaneous sessions, massive packets and no work for it to do but that's not representative.

This I definitely won't agree with. I know I'm beginning to sound like a DDWRT fanboi (to compete with your Cisco fanboism ) - but offering syslog and SNMP is hardly anything to write home about. Those sort of features are bog standard even on consumer routers ime!

Whilst I can't argue with the fact that it's wireless is reliable, I take issue with the fact that you're paying a big premium for the brand name - devices that perform the same or better can be had for less, the Apple isn't using high end premium kit inside.

I don't think you are paying much of a premium though, a quality AP/router from any manufacturer is getting towards £100+, one with gigabit ports, a working IPv6 implementation (even if it is basic features only) and bulletproof wireless - I don't think the price is excessive. And the SNMP and syslog features aren't available on any out of the box device I know of in that price range. I'm willing to be corrected but even with third party firmware can I pull details of connected clients and signal strength via SNMP from the others? Can with the airport. It's a good device, end of story.

The client I'll give you some credit for, I have a mac so the GUI is there already for me so it bothers me far less.

 

[bigredshark]

Because he's controversial. He even admits to not using any consumer grade routers 'for years' and then proceeds to **** them off anyway. My DIR615 is the nuts ffs

It might suit you but it's not perfect by a million miles, good luck accessing IPv6 sites on it (that's going to matter soon), good luck getting a standard, non bodged SIP implementation running through it with it's non existent or non working ALG. Good luck getting any notable speed or range out of the wireless if there's any interference or multiple other networks present. It's also another in the vast parade of consumer devices that seem to think NAT is a firewall and a security measure. And can't manage to use sane correct terminology for things like NAT.

Yes, if you want to connect to the internet, it functionally works. No argument, but it's far from fantastic

 

[Yamahahahahaha]

Again I'd disagree I think, for even middle of the road traffic profiles it's hard work for a router, a Cisco 1841 with CEF enabled can only just do 50Mbps, given these devices don't benefit from CEF you're going to need a serious processor to do the same. I don't imagine any of the current chips in these devices are faster on that traffic profile. It might do 50Mbps downloading from newsgroups with 10 simultaneous sessions, massive packets and no work for it to do but that's not representative.

Cisco kit doesn't really do performance. The 1800 series struggled to do more than 40mbit under optimal conditions as you say.
Even the newer 2900 / 3900 (tops out at around 300mbit/s iirc?) series struggle to really push much data, although they are far more feature rich.
The ASUS RT-N56U will easily do a few hundred meg of LAN -> WAN routing.

Horses for courses and all that.

Edit: Throwing around acronyms doesn't look very classy.

 

[bigredshark]

BRS - Just curious as to why you believe the vast majority of consumer level routers are trash?

Because I can quantify that they are. They lack features or they don't work if they do have the features (IPv6 / ALG / etc), they're less reliable and lower performance than serious vendors equipment.

I design ISP networks for a living, if you browse the internet today in the UK, you're on balance likely to be using infrastructure somewhere which I designed. I've worked with enough of the busiest sites and access networks in the UK to say that now. I know what I'm talking about, I get my home gear for free so it's no matter to me and I'd recommend a £50 box to people for a home router if I could but there isn't one I know off which I'm prepared to endorse, too many have problems, quirks, failures. Most home users will likely be fine with a £70 box and dd-wrt but I'm not going to recommend buying a box and immediately removing the manufacturers software wholesale to people I don't know. Therefore I don't have a recommendation. The reason why not is because everything in that market is in some way flawed.

Yes, part of it is my viewpoint, I don't buy cheap stuff under any circumstance if I can help it, I buy expensive stuff which always works and lasts for bloody ages but I don't waste money, I buy expensive stuff because it's better - while I hate cheap pens, won't use biro's and have a few £30 pens instead I still think you're stupid if you spend £100 on a pen. That's not incompatible. Value for money does not necessarily mean cheap.

 

[Yamahahahahaha]

The difference being that for the majority of users it doesn't make sense to spend hundreds of pounds on a home router when they won't use those features.

By spending £50 now on a 'good' consumer router, and £50 again when they need to move to IPv6, they have saved at least £200 when compared to business grade equipment.

It's a different game for businesses because time is money, where reliability is paramount and speed is something that can be managed and dealt with.

 

[zoomee]

zoomee - bear in mind that it's in breach of the Sky T&Cs to connection equipment not supplied by them. My Sky router failed a while back so I borrowed a DrayTek 2820 from work which just about worked. Sync was 3MB slower than the Sky router and the connection kept resetting itself every couple of hours.

I'm now using the replacement Sky router (after Parcel Farce eventually found it) with the computers connected to an HP Gigabit switch which works well.

Screw sky dude! - If I need support I'll plug the old router back in
One of their tech support actually recommended where to go (ie. skyuser.co.uk) and what to do to get a different modem on there. I've already got my username and details. and I've got two of them sagem modems sat here (one as a backup which I didn't return to them hehe), hell they even got me to plug in an old netgear I had to help diagnose a line problem !

Yes it breaches T&C's mate, but I couldn't care less about them- unless something went wrong lol

Besides tbh - I've had enough of murdoch's empire and am seriously thinking of leaving them!

 

[bigredshark]

Cisco kit doesn't really do performance. The 1800 series struggled to do more than 40mbit under optimal conditions as you say.
Even the newer 2900 / 3900 (tops out at around 300mbit/s iirc?) series struggle to really push much data, although they are far more feature rich.
The ASUS RT-N56U will easily do a few hundred meg of LAN -> WAN routing.

Horses for courses and all that.

Edit: Throwing around acronyms doesn't look very classy.

ASA5505 or Juniper SRX/SSG does performance just fine and the latest 1941 does 150Mbps just fine. By that reckoning Cisco have never done performance, the old 2651XMs could barely push 20Mbps

Sorry, that's just how I write it, it saves a fair bit of time. If it's confused anybody:

PBR is policy based routing, the idea being you can classify traffic by policy and route it according to that. So for instance all traffic from some IPs get's routed by one connection and the rest by another. Loads of uses.

ALG is an application layer gateway, which allows protocols which encode the network address in their traffic deeper down than the header to work over NAT. For instance a SIP packet contains the source address within the data rather than just in the header, NAT only rewrites the header, an ALG will rewrite the packet so that SIP actually works over NAT. Useful to have. Other protocols also benefit from the idea.

CEF is cisco express forwarding and speeds router performance by allowing traffic to be processed without the CPU being involved for every packet. Just think of it as the optimal way for a Cisco device to process traffic. Most consumer devices don't have an analogy as their hardware is lower end and as such all traffic goes to the CPU, which means they're slower.

Any others you feel I've missed?

 

[dmsims]

How many people actually really need Cisco features at home? There are some fine reliable routers for under £150

 

[Yamahahahahaha]

How many people actually really need Cisco features at home? There are some fine reliable routers for under £150

This is what the discussion is about.
I know for sure that the majority of people do not need the features mentioned in this thread. Most people just use the internet for emails, Facebook and Skype.

Maybe the vagueness of the initial question lead to this.

Any others you feel I've missed?

Yes, but without wasting anyone else's time:
Do you genuinely believe that these services will either save the user time or money compared to the time given to understanding or implementing them?
It's the same as the argument as "Why buy a car that can do 200mph when the speed limit is 70mph?"

 

[dmsims]

Maybe the OP would like to set a budget

and the car argument - ever heard of acceleration or track days ?