Small Business Router Recomendation?

[raleighthings]

Looking for the following options.

30/10mpbs minimum speed supported. That's the link we have now.

Larger LAN subnet than a /24.

Dual WAN support would be nice but not required.

Support for multiple 1to1 WAN/NAT setups.

WAN pass through would be nice.

The ability to support VPNs with built in clients for Mac, Win, iPads, iPhones, Androids, etc... with a slight preference to SSL. Slight. Blackberry support would also be nice. But I want to avoid router vendor client requirements if possible. I keep seeing way too many Wait 3 to 6 months for the client update before you update your OS.

This is for an architectural office. Currently we run a mail and external FTP/Web/WebDAV file server for sharing things with the outside world. But we want to start allowing staff to access some of our currently internal only services via VPN setups. Plus take advantage of our current speed.

Any suggestions?

From my reading most routers aimed at smaller businesses don't support a LAN bigger than /24 and it's a bear to find that detail in the literature.

TIA

 

[Shikami]

Perhaps a pfSense (http://www.pfsense.org/) or a Vyatta (http://www.vyatta.com/) based system would suit your needs?

 

[raleighthings]

I'm going to try out this:
http://store.netgate.com/Netgate-m1n1wall-2D3-2D13-Black-P216C83.aspx

Has SNB bench marked any of these or similar items?

Also ordered the encryption card to see how it does.

 

[Shikami]

I prefer PHY's that are based on PCIe, rather than PCI. It can be difficult to find the right micro for the job; and even yet just as expensive. But sometimes a little extra cost can be better for small business, and obviously for a bigger business. These are just a few things to think about, and no tests have been performed here.

You could perhaps build a test system using a PC to get a baseline for yourself, and even see if these solutions is what fits your business' needs.

 

[raleighthings]

At $250 for an assembled unit w/30 return policy it's worth it to me just getting these in to test with.

 

[Shikami]

This is when you use an old system to test . That is why I recommended using a PC to test first.

 

[raleighthings]

And again. At $250 it isn't worth my billable time to build one.

 

[Shikami]

At $250 it isn't worth my billable time to build one.

Ah, consultation? It did not read that way with the previous post(s).

But the recommendation still stands, especially if you consider the "live" method. You, obviously, do not install and can easily check it out using a laptop, desktop, or some old system laying around. I would at least sample before procuring for it may not be the best solution.

$225, not included shipping cost, and not including the handling of the return. Compared to a ROM media that can be RW, and 30 minutes, or an hour of total time with instant hands on instant experience. It is nothing but a very, very minor cost of money and time this way.

 

[raleighthings]

Again. Time is money. And I don't have two gig NIC cards just sitting around. Or a system that I can easily wipe.

 

[thiggins]

The Cisco RV0XX series support multiple /24 subnets. Not sure if they support larger subnets.
Cisco RV042 v3 Dual WAN VPN Router Reviewed

 

[raleighthings]

I've set up several of the RVxxx units. /24 or smaller on all of them. Don't know about the v3 units but I suspect that would be one of the dividing lines that Cisco would use to move someone to the commercial product lines rather than the consumer or prosumer lines.

 

[raleighthings]

I'm going to try out this:
http://store.netgate.com/Netgate-m1n1wall-2D3-2D13-Black-P216C83.aspx

Has SNB bench marked any of these or similar items?

Finally installed one of these on a Metro Ethernet service. It had no trouble running at 44/22 per speedtest.net

I think that's the cap on our line.

 

[dougsk]

I've set up several of the RVxxx units. /24 or smaller on all of them. Don't know about the v3 units but I suspect that would be one of the dividing lines that Cisco would use to move someone to the commercial product lines rather than the consumer or prosumer lines.

Don't mean to bump an old thread well I do cause it's useful info.

On the RV series you CAN have a subnet greater than /24 or less, but if you were to add a second subnet to the lan physical, that subnet can be larger than /24. On the setup tab, select multiple subnet add/edit button and input the subnet and mask you're interested in. You may need to upgrade you firmware to see this option.

 

[raleighthings]

Thanks for the info but it would be nice if their support knew such answers. The pfsense forums are much better at answering similar questions. And from my point of view they seem to have fewer bugs than the big named units under $1000 in price.

 

[GregN]

Thanks for the info but it would be nice if their support knew such answers. The pfsense forums are much better at answering similar questions. And from my point of view they seem to have fewer bugs than the big named units under $1000 in price.

Different type of audience, but I wholly agree. Sort of crowd sourcing of support, I mean the single most active topics here currently, on SNB's forums, is discussion of Asus's N66.

Why aren't those folks over on Asus helping each other? Asus support is horrible (from experience), why can't they put up their own forum for the N66 (no N66 at http://vip.asus.com/forum/ ) ala' pfSense, and help their customers that way?

Isn't it ironic that the products you generally buy, with a few exceptions, have worse support than the products that are just sitting out here for free?

 

[raleighthings]

Free? I paid over $250 each for the pfsense units I'm using.

But the pfsense forums work because some of the developers hang out there and so the signal to noise ratio is quite high. Unlike the various Mozilla forums where it seems the devs seem to avoid so the answers you get are wrong half the time. When you get an answer. And the expectation that the non Moz devs use Bugzilla to see if an issue has been seen before and/or being fixed is, to be blunt, absurd. Maybe not as an ideal but certainly as a practical matter.