"future proof" router

[alternety]

I do realize, in reality, that I can't really get a future proof router. Now, with that out of the way, I have spent days and days reading. Benchmarks, specs, features, forums of all associated phenomena, etc. Net result: headache, bleary eyes, and I still can't make a decision. Every time I think I have a good prospect I find: overheats, fan sounds like a banshee, firmware sucks, won't fit anywhere on the shelf, no third party firmware, really stupid case, reliability from horrible to outstanding on same device, brand sucks across all products or not so much, etc., etc.

I currently have a Motorola SB6120, old router, a switch, 2 PC's, two printers, a couple of control boxes, and an Ooma VOIP box. All pieces that can are running gigabit speeds.I will add an NAS eventually. I wired my house, so wireless is not of much importance to me. If I could use the wireless to stream to a bluetooth headset of use in the yard; that would be nice, but not a requirement. I have had serious problems with the Ooma. If connected directly to the modem, by network speed goes way down (30 Mbps to 6Mbps). Behind the router, serious delays in conversations. My router is an old buffalo.

I want to go to a newer router with more inherent processing and features capability. Speed and IPv6 are my biggest future proof requirements. I am guessing that DD-WRT (or something) compatibility would be a good thing for future proofing and peprhaps performance/features. Best LAN-WAN performers (from this sites reviews) all seem to lack DD-WRT support, overheat, and have firmware that sucks; or not. The first 10 or so routers on the LAN-WAN throughput table is I believe where I would like to be. I mostly don't care about wireless, but there does not appear to be much in the way of new products that are not wireless. Hence posting in this area. A side effect of this is that reviews tend to really concentrate on the wireless part.

Here is a list of what I am looking for. Getting this is an afordable box (< $200) may simply not be possible. But if some of you guys who live, eat, and breathe routers could apply that marvelous parallel procesor that we all (well mostly) keep in our heads, and spit out a solution it would be greatly appreciated and I can start sleeping nights again. There is just too much information for me to integrate.

- Jumbo frames
- Lots of processor power (for fast LAN/WAN, firewall, etc.)
- High LAN-WAN speed
- Gigabit LAN
- IPv6
- DHCP reserve
- Good firewall features
- Good QoS features (using Ooma VOIP)
- logging/displaying cumulative data transfers to WAN - particularly with a sensible GUI to control it
- Decent wireless features
- Good firmware and UI and/or DD-WRT or other support support likely
- Relatively recent product so manufacturer firmware development is likely
- NAT hardware assist and QoS need to play nice together simultaneously and not ruin performance

I await your voices from above.

 

[thiggins]

I wouldn't pin my hopes on DD-WRT as your "Future proof" savior. DD-WRT can create its own set of problems and doesn't really help performance. Yes, it adds bells and whistles, but not necessarily stability.

A few comments on your wishlist. Jumbo frames are much less important with today's faster bus interconnects and Gigabit chipsets. A lot of processing is already offloaded and transmission is about as efficient as it will get without jumbo.

Please define "high" LAN-WAN speed. Remember that speed greatly in excess of what your Internet connection provides doesn't provide any benefit.

No router is going to stream to a Bluetooth headset. 802.11a/b/g/n yes; Bluetooth no.

Of the "big three" (Cisco, NETGEAR, D-Link) D-Link is furthest along in implementing IPv6 on all its routers. Many models also use Ubicom's CPU whose auto-QoS might help you with your Ooma problems. Or it might not. Some VoIP devices are just ornery and don't play nice with routers.

If you want to roll your own router, consider making one yourself using Untangle.

 

[alternety]

It was already a long post so I did not go into more explanations.

Bluetooth - as you have discovered I have not paid a lot of attention to wireless. Scratch that. My long term plan for solving that is an FM transmitter. I am far enough out in the "radio" sticks that a plain radio is unreliable.

DD-WRT - I am thinking not so much about throughput, but functions for an otherwise good router that is lacking something. My needs are not complex. I can't even figure out what a lot of the threads on networking I read are talking about. My knowledge is just way, way , too old. Once upon a time I helped write the 802 standards.

The kind of things that I thought could be helpful would be better QoS implementation, better NAT, possibly a better IPv6 implementation at some point.

Thanks for the explanation on jumbo frames.

High speed - I am probably not going to pay to move to a much higher tier from the cable company. When things are not busy I get short term speeds above 30 Mbps. That should not really stress most any reasonable current router. The speed parameter, in my mind, was more for a surplus of processor power for being able to do more things better while routing. This is changing as vendors make more use of multiple coprocessors to do wireless. But I found in the specs of one router that if QoS was on, they turned NAT hardware assistance off because of significant performance decreases. My thinking is that slowing NAT (and presumably everything else in the processor) will impact throughput. And I believe I need a good QoS implementation (the Ooma thing). So not so much raw wan speed and "other".

Ubicom - I went looking for that after it was mentioned in an earlier post of mine in the non-wireless section here, but did not get anywhere. I am doing that again and am currently exploring a rabbit hole called DrayTek. Their web site is one of those manufacturing mindset things where if you don't know which product you will select, you can't find it in any reasonable way.

I will also take a look at making a router. That is probably my least probable approach right now. I don't have a lot of free time for a new project. I also want reasonable power consumption for this 24X7 router. Which may or may not contraindicate this approach.

Thanks much for your response.

 

[GregN]

I don't really see any other way than building your own, pfSense 2.0 has all of the features you want, plus a whole lot more.

As to being green, you can do an embedded system, that will hit less than 15W, with something like a Alix board.

 

[overdrive31]

Why do people dwell over power usage that would account for only pennies in savings? Trying to run a house off batteries charged by solar and wind? No matter how much research is done to find what you NEED, you will never find what you WANT when every product ever built has it's shortcomings.

Install the Ooma between the modem and router to get better performance. If you want to extend it's bluetooth range, you can buy their wireless adapter(allowing you to move the device closer to where you need bluetooth, but max radius is 33ft. from the Ooma), you may need to put the Ooma in DMZ being behind the router though.

None of the Ubicom routers support third party firmware, and the one I use causes VOIP problems rather than assuring QoS of voice packets.

As for router recommendation, get the Linksys E3000 or E4200, both support third party firmware and provide decent performance.

 

[stevech]

I recommend just buy a $50 WiFi router from one of the three or so mainstream vendors, and plan to replace it every year or two with something better or just more novel.

 

[alternety]

Placing the Ooma between the modem and router reduces WAN speed from 30+ Mbps to less than 6 Mbps. That is what started this quest.

Re: power. I don't go crazy to avoid power use. I already have an annoying amount of steady state consumption. But I also don't ignore power use if it is reasonably avoidable. In addition, the router is part of the phone system. It is on a UPS. In that environment it does matter what the load is.

 

[overdrive31]

Give the Ooma an DHCP reserve and put it in DMZ.

 

[thiggins]

With your level of expertise and Internet speed you should just get an off the shelf router. You may have to try a few to find one that works with Ooma, but that's just the way it is.

Buy from Amazon or BestBuy who don't charge restock fees. Or buy direct from the Cisco Home store and get free shipping and 30 day moneyback. Buy a refurbed model and save even more and also get 30 day return policy.

 

[alternety]

My search continues. I will try the DMZ idea. I have been unable to get my current router to hold an administrative discussion with me for quite some time. I am not going to screw around with my active router. I can't be without internet and phone if I screw something up. Hence, new router to play with. Randomly buying routers and returning them is simply not in the cards. I don't have the time or inclination to experiment with third party on each trial box or even to play in the depths of the native firmware. If I get a good powerful hardware and native /third party support I can play with one at length. IPV6 is not currently not pressing; Comcast has just started a limited function trial end user IPV6 in one town. It will probably be weeks before they field a full interface to everyone.

I have been reading through the sites for DD-WRT, Tomato, and OpenWrt. Much of what I read there is rather techno-gibberish. Not their fault; simply my lack of knowledge (and interest in complex networking issues). I really have some pretty simple needs.

In terms of processing resources (cpu speed, ram) and native throughput I like the Asus RT-56U. I am not encouraged by posts about the manufacturer firmware and their interest in timely ongoing improvements to the firmware.There is an overdue refresh of this router; the RT-66U. The 66 is Broadcom based and apparently not likely to be supported by OpenWrt. The 56 is not Broadcom and may or may not be currently supported by anyone. A couple of the firmware databases say no, but relatively current releases appear in the site for tracking software releases. It seems that the 66 might ship with DD-WRT installed (or at least available) but never have OpenWrt.

In reading about the various firmwares, it appears to me that OpenWrt (or a fork of it) had the most advanced support for IPV6. I have serious reservations about getting into any of the third party firmware. Everyone involved seems to eat and breath this stuff and assumes a real degree of expertise with some derivative of UNIX. Which is not me.

But, if I have a backup working router, I can nibble away at setting up the next one.

Reducing my list of wanna's to resources to deal with complex firmware, handling of Ooma (realizing this may simply not be known), and getting to a fully operable IPV6 router; thoughts of where I should be going.

First, which firmware strikes you as the best bandwagon to jump on. In addition to the ones I mentioned there are branches of some and there are also others. I am not really competent to evaluate their differences and probable long term survival.

After that, a piece of hardware with resources and the most likely path to a good implementation of a full IPV6 capable router.

 

[stevech]

I echo the recommendation to get a basic WiFi router, mainstream brand. Follow the newbie user instructions verbatim.

Ooma may require some port-forwarding. This is easy but only if you understand the concepts and so mechanisms.

Don't mess with DD-WRT/Tomato. Not worth the hassle.

FYI: I tried 4 different home VoIP services and devices. None were anywhere near reliable enough to replace my plain old telephone service (POTS) from AT&T, nor glitch-free enough to satisfy the family here.

I spent a bit more than generic VoIP, but way less that AT&T (barf) was charging, and went with Time Warner Cable's digital phone. It's POTS equivalent. I also got the phone service on a separate modem from my internet cable modem. This is so the Internet going's on don't affect the phone. E911 just HAS to work when it's needed. Been there, experienced that.

 

[runun]

stevtech,

I'm sorry but maybe I'm just confused, but I thought that TWC's digital phone or any digital phone, for that matter, is a VoIP equivalent (not POTS). That's why it's functionality is dependent on being connected to a modem and powered from an AC wall outlet. If you're internet goes down or the power goes out, E911 won't work. POTS gets its power from the phone jacks, which are on a separate system from the power grid that services your home outlets. I dropped my digital phone service almost two years ago and made the switch to Ooma and have been very, very happy with the service. I haven't paid any monthly fees, since purchasing Ooma almost two years ago. However, my annual FCC taxes will go up from a paltry $11.25 to just over $34 per year in the next few months.

 

[stevech]

stevtech,

I'm sorry but maybe I'm just confused, but I thought that TWC's digital phone or any digital phone, for that matter, is a VoIP equivalent (not POTS).

Cable TV digital phone (at least TWC and probably Cox), is quite different from Internet VoIP where you attach a VoIP adapter (ATA) to your LAN and phones. The difference is, esp. in my situation, the digital phone's modem is independent of my Internet modem. It uses different channels/frequencies on the cable TV coax. In months of use of this, it is wireline/POTS equivalent in terms of quality. Reliability has been as good as AT&T was. AT&T's POTS reliability really suffered in my area because, though the housing development is fairly new and has underground cabling, the outage times are way too high - due to a myriad of AT&T employee errors, stealing my pair to placate a neighbor, poor maintenance of the pedestal that gets wet due to lawn sprinklers, and on and on.

The other big deal with Cable digital phone is that their traffic doesn't flow on the minor Internet/IP transport links. Home traffic is bridged to the national WAN operated by TWC (SONET), at the major interface level. So there just is no QoS glitches - none.

I tried 4 different VoIP providers with different ATAs and none could meet the close-enough-to-POTS for me to cut the cord with AT&T. I have done so and it's much cheaper and better. I even get Caller ID on the TV screen.

Finally, just do an about-face to AT&T's silly attempt at digital TV called U-Verse.

I haven't had any TWC IP connectivity (phone or LAN) problems to speak of in the last almost a year of use. From fooling with my LAN, router, switches, etc, I do cause problems now and then, but because I chose to have the digital phone on a separate modem, not connected to my LAN, the fiddling doesn't affect the phone.

Yes, in a large scale power failure, the digital phone via cable won't work. But in the big one recently here (10 hours, all of San Diego county and adjacent), my Verizon cellular worked fine for 911 if needed.