SMBv2 or SMBv3 router?

[ProfoundGlee]

Background: I had a nighthawk r7000 but it was old so I sold it to get something better because it couldn’t handle 1gb fiber and it didn’t like half my drives.

I bought Asus RT-AC3100 but they only have some samba 3 that doesn’t handle SMBv3 and windows strongly dislikes smbv1.

Question: are there any major routers out there that have samba 4 or support for SMB v2/3, AND have mu mimo? If not, what should I get that is an upgrade from the r7000, and how do i do cheap file sharing?

 

[OzarkEdge]

Background: I had a nighthawk r7000 but it was old so I sold it to get something better because it couldn’t handle 1gb fiber and it didn’t like half my drives.

I bought Asus RT-AC3100 but they only have some samba 3 that doesn’t handle SMBv3 and windows strongly dislikes smbv1.

Question: are there any major routers out there that have samba 4 or support for SMB v2/3, AND have mu mimo? If not, what should I get that is an upgrade from the r7000, and how do i do cheap file sharing?

FWIW, the ASUS RT-AC86U does only SMB1... enabled in Windows 7 and can be turned on in Windows 10... and I'm having no luck with the new USB setting to hibernate a drive... it just keeps on spinning.

OE

 

[RMerlin]

Question: are there any major routers out there that have samba 4 or support for SMB v2/3, AND have mu mimo? If not, what should I get that is an upgrade from the r7000, and how do i do cheap file sharing?

So far, I have only seen one router model that has Samba4. The reason is Samba is a pig when it comes to required disk/flash space, and routers are limited in that area. Also, cross-compiling Samba 4 requires voodoo and black magic to work properly.

There are also licensing concerns with later versions of Samba as they changed from GPLv2 to GPLv3. You'd have to ask a legal expert to explain what the change imply tho, I have no idea. But this is apparently another reason why many embedded devices stick with Samba 3.0.xx rather than going with at least 3.6.xx, which would gain SMBv2 support, and carry a less limited impact on flash requirements.

Bottom line: don't rely on a router to do disk sharing. Get a dedicated NAS instead. Router-based sharing is more a marketing gimmick than an actually usable feature nowadays.

 

[sfx2000]

Bottom line: don't rely on a router to do disk sharing. Get a dedicated NAS instead. Router-based sharing is more a marketing gimmick than an actually usable feature nowadays.

Agree - the QNAP TS-128A or Synology DS118 are good single disk NAS boxes - they'll be better in the long run, and offer quite a bit of capability and features for the price.

 

[ProfoundGlee]

So far, I have only seen one router model that has Samba4. The reason is Samba is a pig when it comes to required disk/flash space, and routers are limited in that area. Also, cross-compiling Samba 4 requires voodoo and black magic to work properly.

There are also licensing concerns with later versions of Samba as they changed from GPLv2 to GPLv3. You'd have to ask a legal expert to explain what the change imply tho, I have no idea. But this is apparently another reason why many embedded devices stick with Samba 3.0.xx rather than going with at least 3.6.xx, which would gain SMBv2 support, and carry a less limited impact on flash requirements.

Bottom line: don't rely on a router to do disk sharing. Get a dedicated NAS instead. Router-based sharing is more a marketing gimmick than an actually usable feature nowadays.

Which router?

Honestly, my primary reason for having the router do it was for accessing files from away from home. But without smb, I just kind of was like...well I have to pop the drive out every time I want to load something? Wondrous.

 

[RMerlin]

Which router?

Honestly, my primary reason for having the router do it was for accessing files from away from home. But without smb, I just kind of was like...well I have to pop the drive out every time I want to load something? Wondrous.

Netgear R7800.

My recommendation is to use a VPN to remotely access your network, then access a NAS installed on your network. Not only will it be faster and more reliable, but it will also be much more secure than having your data available right on your primary line of defense.

 

[ProfoundGlee]

Netgear R7800.

My recommendation is to use a VPN to remotely access your network, then access a NAS installed on your network. Not only will it be faster and more reliable, but it will also be much more secure than having your data available right on your primary line of defense.

Well I bought an r9000 because it was only 333 dollars. It ended up frying itself in two weeks.