Discussion:
Good High Speed Router for 60Mbps?
(too old to reply)
David Kaye
2015-01-09 03:23:02 UTC
Permalink
Customer has a 60Mbps Comcast service. Currently a so-called 100Mbps
router/WAP splits it into 4 feeds. But traffic on the LAN side of this
so-called 100Mbps Netgear (4-LAN connections) router barely tops 7Mbps when
one of the 4 network feeds is disconnected and I hook my computer to it and
do a speed test. I'm finding it hard to believe that there is so much
traffic on it (transcient guests) that all the bandwidth is being sucked up.
I suspect that the cheap Netgear router simply isn't throughputting what
they claim the router can do. Also, I'm not comfortable with the idea of
connecting all this traffic to one flimsy router/wap.

Ideas?




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
Jeff Liebermann
2015-01-09 03:36:46 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:23:02 -0800, "David Kaye"
Post by David Kaye
Customer has a 60Mbps Comcast service. Currently a so-called 100Mbps
router/WAP splits it into 4 feeds. But traffic on the LAN side of this
so-called 100Mbps Netgear (4-LAN connections) router barely tops 7Mbps when
one of the 4 network feeds is disconnected and I hook my computer to it and
do a speed test.
Do a speed test how? If from the internet, it's likely there's
something wrong with the computah or the wiring if you can only get
7Mbits/sec. Try taking the router out of the picture and just
benchmarking the Comcast modem. Does it deliver 60 Mbits/sec?

To test just the LAN side of the switch, you'll need two computah.
Setup one with Jperf as a server and run a performance test with Jperf
on the other. Note that the internet is not involved. I typically
get about 80 Mbit/sec TCP (not UDP) throughput with this test.
<https://code.google.com/p/xjperf/>
<http://openmaniak.com/iperf.php>
There are other tools available, but Jperf and iPerf will on all the
operating systems (including Android).
Post by David Kaye
I'm finding it hard to believe that there is so much
traffic on it (transcient guests) that all the bandwidth is being sucked up.
Well, that's a different problem. In theory, any traffic not intended
for the two ports used by the aforementioned test, will not be seen on
those ports. You can run full speed between these two ports without
affecting anything else happening on the other ports.

However, you can overload the internal bus bandwidth of the ethernet
switch. For common routers with 10/100 ports, that's usually about
500 Mbits/sec, which means you won't see a problem. 8 and 16 port
switches commonly can do about 2 Mbits/sec, so again you won't see a
bottleneck. Only the really big switches might have a problem.
Post by David Kaye
I suspect that the cheap Netgear router simply isn't throughputting what
they claim the router can do. Also, I'm not comfortable with the idea of
connecting all this traffic to one flimsy router/wap.
Ideas?
Yes. Try Jperf as above and see what it can do. Also try just an
ordinary ethernet switch to see if there's something broken in the
unspecified model Netgear router.

If you want more performance, check this list:
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/bar/76-total-simul>
--
Jeff Liebermann ***@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Jeff Liebermann
2015-01-09 03:48:56 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:36:46 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <***@cruzio.com>
wrote:
(...)
Post by Jeff Liebermann
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/bar/76-total-simul>
I forgot to mumble that this weeks favored router is a Linksys EA2700
(refurbished) for $30.
<http://store.linksys.com/Routers/Linksys-Refurbished-EA2700-DualBand-N600-Router-With-Gigabit_stcVVproductId149471029VVcatId543906VVviewprod.htm>
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/31738-cisco-linksys-ea2700-gigabit-dual-band-wireless-n600-router-reviewed>
Dual band, Gigabit ethernet, and cheap. On the down side, no flashing
lights, difficult to stack with rounded top, wi-fi range less than
what I would like, and a few obscure settings and acronyms. Next
better model up is $120, so the price is the driving feature for me.

Emulator:
<http://ui.linksys.com/files/EA2700/1.0.12/>
--
Jeff Liebermann ***@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Keith Keller
2015-01-09 04:40:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Liebermann
I forgot to mumble that this weeks favored router is a Linksys EA2700
(refurbished) for $30.
Does it support DD-WRT? A quick check of their db says no, which would
make such a router less useful for me (granted I'm a niche user). I've
been thinking of a new router recently with more laptops coming with
802.11ac (I'm thinking of a new laptop as well, otherwise I wouldn't
bother with new wifi gear).

--keith
--
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
Jeff Liebermann
2015-01-09 17:29:12 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 20:40:01 -0800, Keith Keller
Post by Keith Keller
Post by Jeff Liebermann
I forgot to mumble that this weeks favored router is a Linksys EA2700
(refurbished) for $30.
Does it support DD-WRT? A quick check of their db says no, which would
make such a router less useful for me (granted I'm a niche user).
The DD-WRT database has not been updated for years and is a source of
major confusion. Google or the DD-WRT forum search works better. For
example:
<http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=153481>
<http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=258690>
I don't have time right now to dig out the latest version that works.

For what it's worth, I only use DD-WRT when absolutely necessary. Too
much work and too many problems to make the added features worthwhile.
I'm looking for stability, not features.

Note: If you want range, the EA3200 adds an RF power amp on both
bands. The problem is that it costs about $120 instead of $30.
Post by Keith Keller
I've
been thinking of a new router recently with more laptops coming with
802.11ac (I'm thinking of a new laptop as well, otherwise I wouldn't
bother with new wifi gear).
Yeah, that makes lots of sense. 300+ MBit/sec wireless on maybe a 15
Mbit/sec cable modem connection or a 3 Mbit/sec DSL connection. If
you monitor the association speeds of such high speed wireless, you'll
find that it rarely operates at much over about 54 Mbits/sec. Try it
on 2.4GHz running Jperf or Iperf from a local desktop to a wireless
laptop. Under idea conditions, the best i've done is about 150
Mbits/sec. With a typical polluted office wireless environment, maybe
25 Mbits/sec. Spend your money on something better than acronyms.
--
Jeff Liebermann ***@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Keith Keller
2015-01-09 19:01:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Liebermann
For what it's worth, I only use DD-WRT when absolutely necessary. Too
much work and too many problems to make the added features worthwhile.
I'm looking for stability, not features.
I'm looking for both, honestly. I've had no problems with DD-WRT, and I
greatly prefer its flexibility and consistency with handling port
forwarding, NAT, and related issues.
Post by Jeff Liebermann
Yeah, that makes lots of sense. 300+ MBit/sec wireless on maybe a 15
Mbit/sec cable modem connection or a 3 Mbit/sec DSL connection.
I desire it for my home internal network, so the speed of my internet
connection is irrelevant.

--keith
--
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
David Arnstein
2015-01-09 21:29:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Keller
Post by Jeff Liebermann
For what it's worth, I only use DD-WRT when absolutely necessary. Too
much work and too many problems to make the added features worthwhile.
I'm looking for stability, not features.
I'm looking for both, honestly. I've had no problems with DD-WRT, and I
greatly prefer its flexibility and consistency with handling port
forwarding, NAT, and related issues.
I am thinking about buying a new router and loading it up with DD-WRT
or something similar. I am looking for security. I suspect that all
routers are now back-doored by one government or another. With open
source software, there is a chance that someone will find the bad
code.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+***@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
Keith Keller
2015-01-10 00:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Arnstein
I am thinking about buying a new router and loading it up with DD-WRT
or something similar. I am looking for security. I suspect that all
routers are now back-doored by one government or another. With open
source software, there is a chance that someone will find the bad
code.
I've been using DD-WRT for many years now, and am very happy with it.
And whether vendors' firmwares are backdoored or not, in my experience
the consumer-grade vendor firmwares all suck.

--keith
--
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
David Kaye
2015-01-09 12:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Liebermann
Do a speed test how? If from the internet, it's likely there's
something wrong with the computah or the wiring if you can only get
7Mbits/sec. Try taking the router out of the picture and just
benchmarking the Comcast modem. Does it deliver 60 Mbits/sec?
I left this part out as I figured it was already implied. I plugged the
Comcast modem into my computer and connected via speedtest.net to
MonkeyBrains, which is the server I normally use, since I know that Rudy
always keeps his stuff in top condition. It was there that I got the
60Mbps. But then connecting Comcast to the WAN side of the router and the
computer to the LAN side, the throughput comes out at 7Mbps.

I didn't disconnect the other LAN side outputs, as I now realize I should
have. Perhaps somethig on one of the sub networks is causing the slowness.
I just looked at this thing today and was in a hurry, so I wasn't as
thorough as I should have been, and I also didn't want to wreck any havoc
with people who were using the net at the time.








---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
Jeff Liebermann
2015-01-09 17:43:13 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 04:20:55 -0800, "David Kaye"
Post by David Kaye
Post by Jeff Liebermann
Do a speed test how? If from the internet, it's likely there's
something wrong with the computah or the wiring if you can only get
7Mbits/sec. Try taking the router out of the picture and just
benchmarking the Comcast modem. Does it deliver 60 Mbits/sec?
I left this part out as I figured it was already implied.
I couldn't tell from your description if you were having a WAN -> LAN
or a LAN -> LAN problem.
Post by David Kaye
I plugged the
Comcast modem into my computer and connected via speedtest.net to
MonkeyBrains, which is the server I normally use, since I know that Rudy
always keeps his stuff in top condition. It was there that I got the
60Mbps. But then connecting Comcast to the WAN side of the router and the
computer to the LAN side, the throughput comes out at 7Mbps.
I just got off the phone with exactly the same problem, except it was
a Charter Cable modem that was doing 80 Mbits/sec using speedtest.net
and speedof.me. It was only delivering 40 Mbits/sec to the desktop
(via gigabit). I have iPerf setup on an internet accessible server,
and also on the customers server. A quick test (via Teamviewer)
showed that it was the Belkin N1 router that was the bottleneck. I'll
be replacing that shortly.
Post by David Kaye
I didn't disconnect the other LAN side outputs, as I now realize I should
have. Perhaps somethig on one of the sub networks is causing the slowness.
I just looked at this thing today and was in a hurry, so I wasn't as
thorough as I should have been, and I also didn't want to wreck any havoc
with people who were using the net at the time.
Yep. Other traffic on the LAN will make a difference. Running JPerf
or the various speed tests with users connected is going to affect the
results. I've found it best to disconnect them at the ethernet
switch, run the test, and plug them back in as quickly as possible.
Usually, everything just continues where it left off.

However, going from 60 Mbits/sec down to 7 Mbits/sec is a bit drastic
and suggests some kind of failure. You didn't supply the maker and
model of the router, or any associated equipment, so I can't check how
it does on the WAN -> LAN tests.
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/bar/74-wan-to-lan>
It might be that you have more than one problem.
--
Jeff Liebermann ***@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Roy
2015-01-09 05:33:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Kaye
Customer has a 60Mbps Comcast service. Currently a so-called 100Mbps
router/WAP splits it into 4 feeds. But traffic on the LAN side of this
so-called 100Mbps Netgear (4-LAN connections) router barely tops 7Mbps when
one of the 4 network feeds is disconnected and I hook my computer to it and
do a speed test. I'm finding it hard to believe that there is so much
traffic on it (transcient guests) that all the bandwidth is being sucked up.
I suspect that the cheap Netgear router simply isn't throughputting what
they claim the router can do. Also, I'm not comfortable with the idea of
connecting all this traffic to one flimsy router/wap.
Ideas?
These are all routers/switches. Ratings are via the router portion and
not the switch

Mikrotik RB951Ui-2HnD Rated at 200 Mbps (has wireless)

Mikrotik RB1100AHx2 rated at 1Gbps

Mikrotik CCR1009-8G-1S rated at 3 Gbps. I have a CCR1009 in a client.
Pushes 50-100Mbps at 3% CPU busy. Right now (nighttime) its pushing
20Mbps and the CPU flickers between 0 and 1% busy

Personally, I run an older version of the RB951 rated at 150Mbps. My
connection tops out at 65Mbps so that's all I ever got through it
Roy
2015-01-10 15:07:06 UTC
Permalink
I used speedtest.net this morning.

80Mbps down (processor was at 60% busy)

40 Mbps up (processor was at 30% busy)

This is an older generation of Mikrotik with 400Mhz processor. Current
low end routers are 600Mhz

For those looking for advanced firewall like DD-WRT, the Mikrotik
software is based on Unix so you have the full range of iptables available.
Post by Roy
Post by David Kaye
Customer has a 60Mbps Comcast service. Currently a so-called 100Mbps
router/WAP splits it into 4 feeds. But traffic on the LAN side of this
so-called 100Mbps Netgear (4-LAN connections) router barely tops 7Mbps when
one of the 4 network feeds is disconnected and I hook my computer to it and
do a speed test. I'm finding it hard to believe that there is so much
traffic on it (transcient guests) that all the bandwidth is being sucked up.
I suspect that the cheap Netgear router simply isn't throughputting what
they claim the router can do. Also, I'm not comfortable with the idea of
connecting all this traffic to one flimsy router/wap.
Ideas?
These are all routers/switches. Ratings are via the router portion and
not the switch
Mikrotik RB951Ui-2HnD Rated at 200 Mbps (has wireless)
Mikrotik RB1100AHx2 rated at 1Gbps
Mikrotik CCR1009-8G-1S rated at 3 Gbps. I have a CCR1009 in a client.
Pushes 50-100Mbps at 3% CPU busy. Right now (nighttime) its pushing
20Mbps and the CPU flickers between 0 and 1% busy
Personally, I run an older version of the RB951 rated at 150Mbps. My
connection tops out at 65Mbps so that's all I ever got through it
Loading...