| 1 |
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Daniel Frey <djqfrey@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/28/2017 01:19 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: |
| 3 |
>> The point is: I connected the computers to the lan ports of my |
| 4 |
>> secondary router (with original firmware, but I intended to install |
| 5 |
>> ddwrt), and the setup works, except that the speed never reaches |
| 6 |
>> 100Mbps. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> This is not unusual, the speeds they advertise are device to device |
| 9 |
> (i.e. switched, not routed.) |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
That explains it, then. |
| 12 |
Misleading publicity... I should have asked here before buying... |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> As Mick mentioned, a lot of the all-in-ones don't have enough CPU |
| 20 |
> available to route at those speeds. Some of them do come with hardware |
| 21 |
> offloading, thus taking it off the main CPU but that itself doesn't mean |
| 22 |
> it is able to route at port speed. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> I have the same problem, I had an old RT-N16. It finally crapped out and |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I've been using an RT-N16 for years, and it still works fine. They |
| 27 |
don't advertise big speeds and I understood it doesn't have the CPU |
| 28 |
power to cope. I assumed a new generation router would do the job. Big |
| 29 |
mistake. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I already checked that the ISP/Netgear router is not to blame: |
| 32 |
connecting to a single computer in bridge mode yields about 150Mbps. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Thanks |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Jorge |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
PS. I still would like to know what people in this list think about |
| 39 |
having an ISP managed device as router, re security. Not that I have |
| 40 |
any real option if I want the contracted speed... |
Archives