up vote 1 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

I dont need wireless.

I am expecting very heavy traffic, with possibly thousands of tcp connections open at one time. This would require that the router has good hardware.

I also need to limit the different services i will provide.

Lets say i need to guarantee 60% of all the bandwidth to HTTP, 10% FTP, and 10% for Mail...

So the router software must have flexible QoS options as well.

I don't know which one to chooose, because this information is usually not given on the router specs.

link|improve this question
45% accept rate
1  
Budget? number and speed of ports interfaces? high-availability requirements? – Chopper3 Feb 10 '11 at 12:41
max 200 usd, 2 - 4 ports, good uptime – ULTRA_POROV Feb 10 '11 at 13:06
Go home. Really. "very heavy traffic" is hundreds if megabity today. gigabit capable router, 2-4 ports, 200 usd? Try ebay. – TomTom Feb 10 '11 at 13:41
Unless you're doing connection-tracking (like, say, NAT), the number of simultaneous TCP connections is pretty much a non-issue. What aggregate bandwidth are you expecting? – Vatine Feb 10 '11 at 14:31
2  
Closed? With the new focus this is perfectly applicable for most people having internet connections. Quite a large audience, you know. – TomTom Feb 10 '11 at 14:56
feedback

closed as too localized by Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams, SvenW, Ben Pilbrow, Sam♦, gravyface Feb 10 '11 at 14:44

This question is unlikely to ever help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. See the FAQ for guidance on how to improve it.

3 Answers

up vote 0 down vote

I have D-Link DIR-320 ($50) with dd-wrt installed. It can handle 50mbit torrent traffic with 2000 simultaneous connection (4096 max allowed, never seen reached). dd-wrt (just as other alternative open-source firmware) supports QoS per service, per netmask, per MAC, per Ethernet port. Can't remember when I last made a reset. I have blackouts from time to time though.
Why am I posting this? Actually because I was really surprised with what you can have for $50. I have a linux box configured as a gateway in the office. Well, to be honest, it can be replaced with my home router. I mean if you don't need 2 WAN ports with load-balancing, or snort installed, or 100mbit traffic, those cheap home routers with open-source firmware can easily handle it.

link|improve this answer
Sadly 50mbit are not very heavy traffic. – TomTom Feb 10 '11 at 13:41
@TomTom If it's about office to internet connection, then 50mbit costs many times more per month then router in question. Then I revoke my advice :) I imagined something like 10mbit at most. – Art Shayderov Feb 10 '11 at 14:02
Hm, where do you live? FOr 60 USD per month I can get here 120mbit down / 10mbit up internet, no traffic limits (via cable modems). – TomTom Feb 10 '11 at 14:33
@TomTom Moscow, Russia. I thought we have cheapest internet on Earth. Looks like I was wrong :) – Art Shayderov Feb 10 '11 at 14:46
Poland here. Sadly only city center. I live a little outside. 6mbit only, 512k up - i use a 450g to combine two now, soon possibly 4 links. – TomTom Feb 10 '11 at 14:56
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

For something like 10mbit, 20-30 if you have large packets - look at MIKROTIK (http://www.mikrotik.com). The 450G is a nice little piece I Just put into use here.

It handles all requirements very nicely for me. Problem is with the pathetic CPU this has.... it will give in with 10mbit voip traffic (Small packets). HTTP, EMAIL etc can go a lot higher.

CHeap (100USD), 5 USB ports, very low power usage. And a LOT you can do (MPLS, VLPS etc.).

link|improve this answer
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

Get yourself a nice used Netscreen. Powerful, flexible. That's all I've got to say about that.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.