Computing > Networking & Wireless

Can my PC stop holding me back so I can be free to wander to super-highway?

<< < (8/8)

madires:
Maybe US telcos have to change their "up to" marketing speak too. Frontier lied about internet speed, FTC says in post-net neutrality case: https://www.reuters.com/article/ftc-frontier-communications-speed/update-1-u-s-sues-frontier-communications-regarding-internet-speeds-filing-idUSL2N2N62E4

madires:

--- Quote from: Berni on May 19, 2021, 06:08:10 pm ---Thing is that the NAT performance of a router is not simply X number of Mbits. Its common for a router to show great full link speed
throughput in easy to route scenarios, but outright crash when presented with a particularly difficult routing scenario.

--- End quote ---

We can discuss router architecture if you like. :) It's not hard to achieve 200 - 300 Mbps with a single core CPU around 600 - 800 MHz. And more and more SOHO router SoCs include hardware NAT, even inexpensive ones for 50 bucks. What do you mean by a "particularly difficult routing scenario"? A typical SOHO router has one gateway, maybe a few local networks and a few VPNs. Add IPv6 and you might have 10 or 20 routes. These can be easily handled by a software based router. For 200 bucks you get router with a dual-core ARM running at 1.x GHz. Plenty of performance for more complex firewall rules and high speed internet access. Much more than old and expensive CPU-based Cisco routers two decades ago, handling 150k routes with a few hundred MHz fast MIPS CPU.

Berni:

--- Quote from: madires on May 19, 2021, 09:31:48 pm ---We can discuss router architecture if you like. :) It's not hard to achieve 200 - 300 Mbps with a single core CPU around 600 - 800 MHz. And more and more SOHO router SoCs include hardware NAT, even inexpensive ones for 50 bucks. What do you mean by a "particularly difficult routing scenario"? A typical SOHO router has one gateway, maybe a few local networks and a few VPNs. Add IPv6 and you might have 10 or 20 routes. These can be easily handled by a software based router. For 200 bucks you get router with a dual-core ARM running at 1.x GHz. Plenty of performance for more complex firewall rules and high speed internet access. Much more than old and expensive CPU-based Cisco routers two decades ago, handling 150k routes with a few hundred MHz fast MIPS CPU.

--- End quote ---

The particularly difficult scenario is the high speed port scanning task. This is because a NAT has to keep track of who opened a connection to who. But there are routers that can't even keep up with simply having a lot of clients on the network. Routing happens on a packet by packet basis, so 100Mbit/s of 100 byte packets puts a way way more strain on a NAT than 100Mbit/s of 1500 byte packets.

And yes you can get great throughput using just SoC chips, this is what pretty much all of the MikroTik routers use and they are bulletproof. More of the issue are the cheep consumer home networking solutions. The gear from people like Asus, TPLink, Dlink, Netgear.. etc tends to not handle more demanding routing scenarios while at the same time the firmware in general tends to be a crappy unstable mess that for some reason starts acting up after 3 months of uptime (I solved networking issues so many times by simply rebooting a cheap crappy router). But the routers that you get built into the modems, those tend to be even a step below those home solutions as they are the cheapest off brand piece of crap that the ISP could find on the market, since if they are giving them out for free they might as well spend as little money as possible on them. At least that is what i see ISPs giving out over here. Perhaps the ISPs from your area spend more money on quality modems.

I convinced quite a few friends to spend the extra money on a SOHO grade router and they quickly noticed a big difference in how much more performant and stable there internet has become (before they blamed the ISP for crappy service).

madires:

--- Quote from: Berni on May 20, 2021, 05:18:17 am ---The particularly difficult scenario is the high speed port scanning task. This is because a NAT has to keep track of who opened a connection to who. But there are routers that can't even keep up with simply having a lot of clients on the network. Routing happens on a packet by packet basis, so 100Mbit/s of 100 byte packets puts a way way more strain on a NAT than 100Mbit/s of 1500 byte packets.

--- End quote ---

I agree, if you're doing such things then you'll need a SOHO router with more performance. Cheap plastic boxes (slow CPU, not much RAM) won't hold up with that. BTW, a proper datasheet for a router will tell you also the maximum "packets per second" rating.


--- Quote from: Berni on May 20, 2021, 05:18:17 am ---More of the issue are the cheep consumer home networking solutions. The gear from people like Asus, TPLink, Dlink, Netgear.. etc tends to not handle more demanding routing scenarios while at the same time the firmware in general tends to be a crappy unstable mess that for some reason starts acting up after 3 months of uptime (I solved networking issues so many times by simply rebooting a cheap crappy router).

--- End quote ---

Yep, the original firmwares of those are usually crappy. But in many cases you can crossgrade to an alternative firmware like OpenWRT which runs quite stable and also provides much better IPv6 support.


--- Quote from: Berni on May 20, 2021, 05:18:17 am ---But the routers that you get built into the modems, those tend to be even a step below those home solutions as they are the cheapest off brand piece of crap that the ISP could find on the market, since if they are giving them out for free they might as well spend as little money as possible on them. At least that is what i see ISPs giving out over here. Perhaps the ISPs from your area spend more money on quality modems.

--- End quote ---

Over here the routers with built-in modem offered by telcos are the more expensive types. For DSL routers the standard feature set is VDSL super vectoring, DECT base station, VoIP ATA (2 FXO ports), WLAN, and capable of more than 250Mbps in any case. More or less a middle class FritzBox.

Marco:

--- Quote from: Syntax Error on March 10, 2021, 01:18:03 am ---Don't forget the FTTP end... For max speed, ditch the domestic router and get youself a lot of gaming wifi bandwidth...

--- End quote ---
Occasionally the provider hardware is pretty good, if it's already 802.11ax buying an expensive wireless router won't necessarily get you much.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version