Cisco RV016 question regarding multi WAN abilities

[Matce]

Hi guys,
I hope somebody here can help as Cisco is unable to answer a simple question without having to run through registration-processes and calling all around the world

Can we use the RV016 to connect several modems and therefore combine bandwith or is the MultiWAN only for failsafe?

How many modems/internet connections can we connect to combine?

thanks!

 

[System Error Message]

you can (may depend on model) with the cisco RV however i would not count on the cisco RV for reliability not to mention cisco treats their customers who buy cisco rv differently from their enterprise teir products. The cisco RV is a consumer class device. This means you can just get any of the recent consumer routers and do the same thing for multiWAN. VPN performance wise the ARM A9s are faster than MIPS used in the cisco RVs.

Like any consumer router the most you can combine is up to 2 however if you consider non consumer like pfsense, mikrotik, ubiquiti (with 5 ports or more) they can all perform multiWAN with as many WANs as you like. Mikrotik and pfsense will happily do thousands of WAN connections as long as you have the CPU power for the throughput and memory for all those connections.

 

[Matce]

hey, thanks for your quick reply

Cisco states for the RV016:

• Two dedicated Fast Ethernet WAN ports
• Thirteen additional Fast Ethernet ports, five of which may be configured for load balancing or redundant connections to service providers

so I would assume it can combine 5 ports for bandwidth!?

basically we need a device that can do 4+ modems and combine the bandwith... and it has to be on a budget (startup-company!).
what would you recommend?

 

[System Error Message]

It depends on the skill available. If the skill is there go for mikrotik. One thing mikrotik can do is that you can attach the WAN port of a mikrotik router to a switch and attach multiple modems to that switch assuming if they all use PPPOE. Load balancing for PPPOE is difficult though. It also depends on the bandwidth but the RB850gx2 has enough CPU power for gigabit internet or less if you add firewall and QoS (really hasnt been publicly tested). The PPC CPU offers a performance advantage over other platforms when it comes to bigger configurations.

For pfsense it is much easier to load balance multiple connections but i am not sure if it can do the same thing mikrotik can however you can add ports to an existing PC and connect those ports to modem. All you need is an x86 platform (one that doesnt use realtek NICs), add some intel dual/quad port NICs and you will have an inexpensive platform with a lot of capability.

Based on the description the RV016 is capable of 7 WANs but not sure if they can all be load balanced together (max 5). I would recommend pfsense first because it can be done with an old PC since the cisco RV series have the same quality of firmware as consumer routers do so they are not good if you need reliability. Mikrotik are a lot more reliable than cisco RV and they have a lot more choices not to mention you can get gigabit ethernets by using either pfsense or mikrotik route. They also require a lot more skill to configure but are very rewarding if you know how to configure one.

The mikrotik RB1100ahx2 has 13 ethernet ports but has a weird architecture that needs attention when setting up multiple WANs but is twice as fast as the RB850gx2 with more ports. If the fan is a bother (tends to be noisy) than you can go for the fanless CCR1009 with the PC suffix which is an even faster router with 8 ethernet ports, 1SFP+ and 1 SFP port but with a big heatsink. There are older, cheaper mikrotik routerboards with passive cooling that have many ethernet ports but be sure to calculate their throughput (based on CPU from a known newer one). Each CCR core does 2Gb/s on CPU connected port, same for the PPC but PPC is a bit faster than TILE (in the CCR) per core.

 

[Matce]

It depends on the skill available. If the skill is there go for mikrotik. One thing mikrotik can do is that you can attach the WAN port of a mikrotik router to a switch and attach multiple modems to that switch assuming if they all use PPPOE. Load balancing for PPPOE is difficult though. It also depends on the bandwidth but the RB850gx2 has enough CPU power for gigabit internet or less if you add firewall and QoS (really hasnt been publicly tested). The PPC CPU offers a performance advantage over other platforms when it comes to bigger configurations.

For pfsense it is much easier to load balance multiple connections but i am not sure if it can do the same thing mikrotik can however you can add ports to an existing PC and connect those ports to modem. All you need is an x86 platform (one that doesnt use realtek NICs), add some intel dual/quad port NICs and you will have an inexpensive platform with a lot of capability.

Based on the description the RV016 is capable of 7 WANs but not sure if they can all be load balanced together (max 5). I would recommend pfsense first because it can be done with an old PC since the cisco RV series have the same quality of firmware as consumer routers do so they are not good if you need reliability. Mikrotik are a lot more reliable than cisco RV and they have a lot more choices not to mention you can get gigabit ethernets by using either pfsense or mikrotik route. They also require a lot more skill to configure but are very rewarding if you know how to configure one.

The mikrotik RB1100ahx2 has 13 ethernet ports but has a weird architecture that needs attention when setting up multiple WANs but is twice as fast as the RB850gx2 with more ports. If the fan is a bother (tends to be noisy) than you can go for the fanless CCR1009 with the PC suffix which is an even faster router with 8 ethernet ports, 1SFP+ and 1 SFP port but with a big heatsink. There are older, cheaper mikrotik routerboards with passive cooling that have many ethernet ports but be sure to calculate their throughput (based on CPU from a known newer one). Each CCR core does 2Gb/s on CPU connected port, same for the PPC but PPC is a bit faster than TILE (in the CCR) per core.

thanks so much for your input!
To be perfectly honest... we got no skill in setting up any of this, so somebody will need to be hired.
I took a look at the RB1100ahx2 you mentioned... pricewise we are right there. This unit could handle 4+ LTE modems and combine their bandwidth?
thanks!

 

[System Error Message]

ah you're connecting multiple 3g/4g modems. throughput wise even a MIPS based CPU could handle it unless you manage to get near 100Mb/s for each

The unit can handle as many WANs as you like but there is a limitation of 2Gb/s per direction because of the architecture. It has 3 ports connected to the CPU directly and 2 switched port groups each having 5 ports. Each switch chip has a 1Gb/s bidirectional link to the CPU. This means that the total throughput for everything that is switched is 1Gb/s per direction. Im not too sure about its capability in load balancing PPPOE links but there are a few ways to load balance things. First is to have the NAT firewall configured with a rate limit. If you had 5 modems than there will be 5 NAT rules each with a rate limit except for the last. Another is to set multiple routes with the same weightage. Load balancing options depends on how it is set up. There is a demo at http://demo.mt.lv of the OS. If you can use a general NAT rule that covers all 5 WAN ports in a single definition than it will load balance it if you have all the routes with the same weightage.

This may help in what you need http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:PCC#Application_Example_-_Load_Balancing

 

[Matce]

ah you're connecting multiple 3g/4g modems. throughput wise even a MIPS based CPU could handle it unless you manage to get near 100Mb/s for each

The unit can handle as many WANs as you like but there is a limitation of 2Gb/s per direction because of the architecture. It has 3 ports connected to the CPU directly and 2 switched port groups each having 5 ports. Each switch chip has a 1Gb/s bidirectional link to the CPU. This means that the total throughput for everything that is switched is 1Gb/s per direction. Im not too sure about its capability in load balancing PPPOE links but there are a few ways to load balance things. First is to have the NAT firewall configured with a rate limit. If you had 5 modems than there will be 5 NAT rules each with a rate limit except for the last. Another is to set multiple routes with the same weightage. Load balancing options depends on how it is set up. There is a demo at http://demo.mt.lv of the OS. If you can use a general NAT rule that covers all 5 WAN ports in a single definition than it will load balance it if you have all the routes with the same weightage.

This may help in what you need http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:PCC#Application_Example_-_Load_Balancing

hey, thanks again for your input.
So this unit doesnt have a user-interface where I can just click stuff and type in some minor things?
I can't program at all... zero

 

[System Error Message]

It has a GUI where you can put stuff in but the way it works is that it doesnt have everything where you tick around. You add rules to create things the way you want. There are many examples and guides online and in the wiki which is why you need someone with the skill and knowledge for mikrotik.

 

[Cloud200]

If you need something dead simple and will absolutely for sure work . . . try peplink.
I have a few out in the field that just work and honestly have some of the easiest to use load balancing out there.
Demo page: http://www.peplink.com/products/balance/live-demo/

The models you want are the Balance 30 or the Balance 50.
It should cost anywhere between $300 and $500 depending on the model you get.

If you need to scrimp on the cost . . . the absolute cheapest router I know of that will do it is the TP-Link TL-R470T+
It costs about $60
There are two faster versions of it;
The TL-R480T+ and the much faster TL-ER5120
They are between $100 and $200 depending on where you get them from.
Demo page: http://www.tp-link.com/resources/simulator/TL-R480T+/userRpm/Index.htm

 

[System Error Message]

both the tp-link and peplink are more reliable than the cisco rv series. Mikrotik offers a lot more features and is cheaper for what you get. peplink is very expensive if you need more ports and throughput but have good support. tp-link offers basic features. it reaaly depends on what you need.

 

[Matce]

If you need something dead simple and will absolutely for sure work . . . try peplink.
I have a few out in the field that just work and honestly have some of the easiest to use load balancing out there.
Demo page: http://www.peplink.com/products/balance/live-demo/

The models you want are the Balance 30 or the Balance 50.
It should cost anywhere between $300 and $500 depending on the model you get.

If you need to scrimp on the cost . . . the absolute cheapest router I know of that will do it is the TP-Link TL-R470T+
It costs about $60
There are two faster versions of it;
The TL-R480T+ and the much faster TL-ER5120
They are between $100 and $200 depending on where you get them from.
Demo page: http://www.tp-link.com/resources/simulator/TL-R480T+/userRpm/Index.htm

I took a look at the Balance50 and it fits the budget.
How many modems can we connect to this unit and combine bandwidth? 5?

thanks!

both the tp-link and peplink are more reliable than the cisco rv series. Mikrotik offers a lot more features and is cheaper for what you get. peplink is very expensive if you need more ports and throughput but have good support. tp-link offers basic features. it reaaly depends on what you need.

thanks for the input.

We only have ONE REQUIREMENT: connect 3-4 LTE modems and COMBINE their bandwidth.

 

[System Error Message]

I took a look at the Balance50 and it fits the budget.
How many modems can we connect to this unit and combine bandwidth? 5?

thanks!



thanks for the input.

We only have ONE REQUIREMENT: connect 3-4 LTE modems and COMBINE their bandwidth.

all 3 suggestions can combine their bandwidth, only the choice depends on what comes with it. With TP-link expect basic functionality and lack of support. With peplink expect to spend more and get good support and some enterprise features that you can use for your network. with mikrotik expect a less than average support (email and forum dependent) but also brings enterprise features at a good price and performance.

I can understand the need to combine bandwidth and that is your MAIN REQUIREMENT not ONE REQUIREMENT but pfsense, peplink (not sure about their bonding models) and mikrotik have web cache that can speed up internet browsing and use less bandwidth overall. They also have other network features such as DNS server which you can have local domains and cache, NTP server, RADIUS server for authentication. The use of local DNS and NTP server is very useful on a high latency network such as on wifi based WANs. They can also be secured to protect against the pineapple hack which almost every home and public network is vulnerable to. The need to have more bandwidth can be softened with these features and the security features that they have to reduce the impact of the usual botnets. Combining mobile networks for more bandwidth is a solution but mobile networks have higher latency that you will appreciate having local network services.

Your choice from the suggestions really just comes down to whether you need performance, enterprise features and support.

The peplink 50 can handle 5 WANS (6 if you include usb modem) but its maximum throughput is 100Mb/s which may be saturated depending on the quality of your mobile internet.

 

[Matce]

all 3 suggestions can combine their bandwidth, only the choice depends on what comes with it. With TP-link expect basic functionality and lack of support. With peplink expect to spend more and get good support and some enterprise features that you can use for your network. with mikrotik expect a less than average support (email and forum dependent) but also brings enterprise features at a good price and performance.

I can understand the need to combine bandwidth and that is your MAIN REQUIREMENT not ONE REQUIREMENT but pfsense, peplink (not sure about their bonding models) and mikrotik have web cache that can speed up internet browsing and use less bandwidth overall. They also have other network features such as DNS server which you can have local domains and cache, NTP server, RADIUS server for authentication. The use of local DNS and NTP server is very useful on a high latency network such as on wifi based WANs. They can also be secured to protect against the pineapple hack which almost every home and public network is vulnerable to. The need to have more bandwidth can be softened with these features and the security features that they have to reduce the impact of the usual botnets. Combining mobile networks for more bandwidth is a solution but mobile networks have higher latency that you will appreciate having local network services.

Your choice from the suggestions really just comes down to whether you need performance, enterprise features and support.

hey, thanks again - you certainly know ur stuff
Lets stick to those 3 models you recommended: How many modems can I connect to each unit?
I looked up the Peplink50 closer and it says it has NO "speedfusion bonding" - I am not sure if that is just some premium way to combine speed or if that means that it can't do it at all?

thanks!

 

[System Error Message]

This should explain it. http://www.peplink.com/technology/speedfusion-bonding-technology/
If you use VPN or tunnels between your own stuff than you can use that over a load balanced multi-WAN.

The peplink is limited to it's license and specs. TP-link limited by specs and ports. PFsense and mikrotik not limited. Both Pfsense and mikrotik can perform as many WANs as you like where all you need is 1 port and a managed switch. For example you could have a 24 port managed switch, have 23 modems and connect them to mikrotik/pfsense using vlans to seperate them and load balance 23 WANs via 1 single ethernet port.

 

[Cloud200]

This should explain it. http://www.peplink.com/technology/speedfusion-bonding-technology/
If you use VPN or tunnels between your own stuff than you can use that over a load balanced multi-WAN.

The peplink is limited to it's license and specs. TP-link limited by specs and ports. PFsense and mikrotik not limited. Both Pfsense and mikrotik can perform as many WANs as you like where all you need is 1 port and a managed switch. For example you could have a 24 port managed switch, have 23 modems and connect them to mikrotik/pfsense using vlans to seperate them and load balance 23 WANs via 1 single ethernet port.

Agreed. Unless you are going to bond links for site to site vpn or link up to an ec2 instance hosting a server . . . that's all speed fusion is good for.