1 |
On Wednesday, 27 November 2019 01:51:44 GMT Dale wrote: |
2 |
> Rich Freeman wrote: |
3 |
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:10 PM Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> >> I went to Newegg. Hey, I buy stuff there sometimes. Anyway, I've |
5 |
> >> looked at several routers and none of them mention IPv6 that I can |
6 |
> >> find. I even skimmed the reviews and can't find a mention of it. Is |
7 |
> >> there some secret way to know when IPv6 is supported? Is it called |
8 |
> >> something else maybe? |
9 |
|
10 |
It is called the OEM's website where technical specs are provided for each |
11 |
model. |
12 |
|
13 |
It is also called Wikipedia. There may be a page where all models of a |
14 |
particular manufacturer are listed in some table, explaining their |
15 |
functionality. |
16 |
|
17 |
There are also webpages with reviews - but careful with those. Most are |
18 |
nothing more than a shill for Amazon or some such shop, rather than an honest |
19 |
technical appraisal. Sometimes youtube may have an unwrapping video, or demo |
20 |
of configuring a particular router - if you are interested to know what they |
21 |
look like in more detail. |
22 |
|
23 |
There are specialist websites like: |
24 |
|
25 |
https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/ |
26 |
|
27 |
as well as open source firmware projects like OpenWRT/DD-WRT etc., with useful |
28 |
blogs and forums to peruse, along with reports for suitable hardware. |
29 |
|
30 |
Online shops are the last place to visit, *after* you have concluded which |
31 |
router is best for you, to see if you can afford the price. Their websites |
32 |
may have incorrect technical information, out of date specifications and |
33 |
irrelevant (annoying) marketing speak to attract consumers. Many are just |
34 |
box-shifters and wouldn't be able to tell you what's in the box you ordered |
35 |
anyway: "errm ... whatever they're shipping from China these days". o_O |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
> > IMO there are three reasonable approaches you can take towards getting |
39 |
> > a router you won't curse yourself for buying a year from now: |
40 |
> > |
41 |
> > 1. DIY. PC or other general-purpose computing hardware with multiple |
42 |
> > NICs. There are SBCs that work well for this. You can run pfsense or |
43 |
> > some other router-oriented distro/software/wrappers. Or you can just |
44 |
> > roll your own with netfilter and such. Max flexibility, but also max |
45 |
> > fuss. Unless you use a SBC you'll also be paying a price in |
46 |
> > electricity. Don't underestimate how much you pay for any x86-based |
47 |
> > system that runs 24x7 - especially anything old you have lying around. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> I remember how my old rig pulled power. It pulled like 400 watts or so |
50 |
> idle. Of course, it was lacking in power so when compiling, there |
51 |
> wasn't a lot of difference really. In the winter, I rarely needed a |
52 |
> heater. Its constant heat output kept this bedroom comfy. No real need |
53 |
> for a heater. It's one reason I want to avoid this option. Mostly, I |
54 |
> want something I'll get many years of service from and everything work |
55 |
> well, wired or wireless now that I have a cell phone and printer that |
56 |
> needs it. My current router pulls like 10 watts or something. |
57 |
> Considering I run electric heat and such, it's a rounding error for me. |
58 |
> Heck, my main puter is too. It pulls like 180 watts which includes |
59 |
> everything, modem, router, monitor and the rig itself. |
60 |
> |
61 |
> The positive part tho for option 1, if another port is needed, just add |
62 |
> a network card and it's done. With DHCP and friends, it will likely |
63 |
> just work. That's something you can't do with a store bought router. |
64 |
> Whatever it comes with, that's what you got. I've never needed more |
65 |
> than the 4 most come with tho. My puter uses one, printer another and |
66 |
> cell phone. I guess I have one left still. |
67 |
|
68 |
Every additional network card (PCI or USB) will also incur additional cost and |
69 |
soon you could run out of MoBo slots. It makes more sense to buy a dedicated |
70 |
switch instead, with as many ports as you think you will need to use in the |
71 |
future. Old routers can also be used as dumb switches, after you disable |
72 |
their DNS/DHCP/PPP, etc. The world is moving towards high speed wireless |
73 |
connectivity anyway, so more and more devices will not need a physical switch |
74 |
port or ethernet cables to gain access to the network. |
75 |
|
76 |
|
77 |
> > 2. OpenWRT/DD-WRT/etc. Again it is a bit fussy but generally way |
78 |
> > less so than going pure DIY unless you're running pfsense or some |
79 |
> > other appliance-oriented distro. If you go this route then definitely |
80 |
> > check for recommendations on hardware that is known to work WELL. |
81 |
> > Some stuff technically works but can be very prone to having to play |
82 |
> > around with JTAG and such if you make the slightest mistake. You'll |
83 |
> > probably spend an extra $20 on hardware you won't regret buying - do |
84 |
> > it. |
85 |
|
86 |
+1 |
87 |
|
88 |
Trying to save a few pennies could result in being lumbered with suboptimal |
89 |
hardware. |
90 |
|
91 |
|
92 |
> That's what I'm wanting as a option. I may just use the firmware that |
93 |
> comes with the thing for a good while. Later on tho, if needed, I may |
94 |
> switch to Openwrt or some other option that may work better. It's a |
95 |
> option I'd like to have if possible. |
96 |
|
97 |
This is generally a good option because OEMs hardly ever bother upgrading |
98 |
their initial firmware these days. They're more interested to ship the next |
99 |
model, or the same model in a shinier box. As a result loads of routers are |
100 |
running around the world with actively exploited vulnerabilities. At least |
101 |
with OpenWRT and friends you have a live opensource project actively trying to |
102 |
keep on top of the latest SNAFU. |
103 |
|
104 |
|
105 |
> > 3. Something commercial that isn't terrible. There are various |
106 |
> > options, but everybody always points to Ubiquiti and I'm mostly happy |
107 |
> > with them. If you want something that is more gui-based I'd go with |
108 |
> > their Unifi line. I'd avoid Amplifi as it is more consumer-oriented |
109 |
> > and you'll end up being frustrated with it. EdgeOS is getting closer |
110 |
> > to something like OpenWRT - it runs linux and you can get a shell and |
111 |
> > mess around with the CLI. However, while the EdgeOS routing options |
112 |
> > are great they aren't so good with WiFi and EdgeOS and Unifi don't |
113 |
> > interoperate all that well (not impossible, but they don't really talk |
114 |
> > to each other so you have to maintain two configs). I also really |
115 |
> > dislike that the EdgeOS management software is only supplied as a |
116 |
> > docker image, which is a pain if you're not using docker (one of these |
117 |
> > days I'll have to get it working with my bridge interface as it always |
118 |
> > tries to create its own and ends up having no physical network |
119 |
> > access). The Unifi controller software is packaged for a couple of |
120 |
> > distros which makes it much more flexible to deploy (and you can use |
121 |
> > it on docker if you wish). |
122 |
> > |
123 |
> > Personally I'm running EdgeOS on my router and Unifi on everything |
124 |
> > else. If I could go back I might have gone with Unifi on the gateway |
125 |
> > but it does bug me that it is so much more expensive and does the same |
126 |
> > thing. If I had it then end-to-end VLAN/etc would be much more |
127 |
> > practical, though I'd need a pile of managed switches to make it work |
128 |
> > well. |
129 |
> > |
130 |
> > I've run all three options at various points. Unless your needs are |
131 |
> > special I think there is value in just going with #3. It just runs |
132 |
> > itself for the most part, and if you want multiple access points or |
133 |
> > anything like that the network basically runs itself. I just plug in |
134 |
> > new hardware and then on the controller software it shows up, and one |
135 |
> > click provisions it which configures it to fit in with all my global |
136 |
> > settings. |
137 |
> |
138 |
> This is why I might buy one compatible with Openwrt but wait until the |
139 |
> wireless stuff gets sorted out. Like I said above, I'd like it as a |
140 |
> option so finding one that Openwrt supports should increase my odds if |
141 |
> they get everything working nicely later on. I still remember the old |
142 |
> USB days when it was new. It was buggy and stuff didn't work right |
143 |
> every time. After a while tho, they got most the kinks worked out. I |
144 |
> think Openwrt and others will do the same. It may take a bit but maybe |
145 |
> by the time I'm ready to try it, it will be awesomeness. |
146 |
> |
147 |
> I just want to avoid replacing my current router with a router that also |
148 |
> doesn't have IPv6 support and has limited options later on. Even google |
149 |
> isn't helping me much on that. |
150 |
|
151 |
Look at my suggestions above on how to investigate the availability of IPv6 or |
152 |
other desired functionality of candidate routers. |
153 |
|
154 |
Something I hadn't mentioned, merely because I don't know if it will work with |
155 |
your old router, is to hack the hardware itself. Replacing the flash disk and |
156 |
RAM with larger components may land you a more capable device for no/little |
157 |
extra cost. Just use one of the RAM modules you have lying around in your |
158 |
spares bin and hope the chipset is capable of booting and utilising it. Some |
159 |
SoCs are crippled by design, having a max RAM capacity they will initialise |
160 |
hardcoded in their boot code. They may not see or use more RAM and may even |
161 |
refuse to boot with it. Nevertheless, it could be an interesting project for |
162 |
a rainy day, on a router which is on its way out anyway: |
163 |
|
164 |
http://neophob.com/2006/01/wrt54g-ram-upgrade/ |
165 |
|
166 |
-- |
167 |
Regards, |
168 |
|
169 |
Mick |