Cisco RV vs EdgeRouter vs PepLink Balance vs ________ for Dual WAN Failover Router

[Avery]

How about Peplink Balance?

The Balance One Core looks pretty capable. The Balance 30 LTE appears to do everything I need in a single box (including LTE Sim card and external antenna), but is only 200 Mbps throughput... doesn't that seem quite low?

I only have 100 Mbps service currently, though Comcast cable service available through 1 Gig... however, still don't understand the need for > 100 Mbps service if just watching HD video/web browsing/video conferencing, etc. Maybe someone can explain if increased bandwidth gives some other edge beyond downloading large files.

I *think* these can run OpenVPN server, as well for connecting home over VPN.

 

[Tech9]

How about Peplink Balance?

Reliable products for Multi-WAN.

Maybe someone can explain if increased bandwidth gives some other edge beyond downloading large files.

Web browsing experience is about the same, downloads are faster. In my place 75Mbps to Gigabit is about 2x the price for a >12x faster connection. For cable connections faster plan comes usually with faster upload. I pay for 500Mbps because of faster upload, for example.

 

[coxhaus]

My guess is that router costs are going up since security has turned into such a big deal that requires lots of software support nowadays. Cisco is releasing security firmware fixes 2 to 3 times a year. It has to be costing them.

 

[Avery]

Ok, so Peplink is good on the failover. Anyone have experience to know how a Balance One Core would compare to a EdgeRouter 4 or EdgeRouter X? It is hard looking at throughput numbers to know how it performs, and there must be some reason that the Peplink costs 6x.

 

[Christos]

Maybe someone can explain if increased bandwidth gives some other edge beyond downloading large files.

Low latency is more important than speed and bandwidth. It will make your connection feel faster and voice/video calls more reliable.
For low latency you need QoS and bandwidth is the enemy of QoS because faster connections need faster CPU for QoS.

 

[Tech9]

For low latency you need QoS

You need low latency ISP, not QoS on the client device - your router.

bandwidth is the enemy of QoS

Really? If you don't saturate your connection, the latency will stay low with no QoS.

 

[Avery]

Agreed on latency, though I would think if operating under the throughput limit of the device, that would not be affected by device.

Yes, QoS would also be good... for those rare moments where a large download occurs when someone is on a call or video conferencing. I had noticed that the Peplink and EdgeRouter both had QOS listed. Is there a lot of variance across QOS implementations, or generally they are all pretty consistent from a configurability and functionality perspective?

 

[Christos]

Agreed on latency, though I would think if operating under the throughput limit of the device, that would not be affected by device.

Yes, QoS would also be good... for those rare moments where a large download occurs when someone is on a call or video conferencing. I had noticed that the Peplink and EdgeRouter both had QOS listed. Is there a lot of variance across QOS implementations, or generally they are all pretty consistent from a configurability and functionality perspective?

Edgerouter supports FQ_CODEL QoS that minimizes latency.
ER-X supports up to 100Mbps with QoS enabled and up to 940Mbps without QoS (HW offload)
ER-4 supports up to 600Mbps with QoS enabled and up to 940Mbps without QoS (HW offload)

 

[Avery]

Edgerouter supports FQ_CODEL QoS that minimizes latency.
ER-X supports up to 100Mbps with QoS enabled and up to 940Mbps without QoS (HW offload)
ER-4 supports up to 600Mbps with QoS enabled and up to 940Mbps without QoS (HW offload)

That is really good information, Christos, and a clear distinguisher between the two.

 

[vw-tx]

TP-Link has several routers that support Multi-Wan.

Omada Gigabit VPN Router

ER7206 supports Gigabit Ethernet connections on both WAN and LAN ports and multiple VPN protocols and high-security, high-performance VPN capabilities, making employees’ remote connections to their main offices as secure as if they were in the main office.

www.tp-link.com

Omada Gigabit VPN Router

Omada ER605 supports Gigabit Ethernet connections on both WAN and LAN ports and multiple VPN protocols and high-security, high-performance VPN capabilities, making employees’ remote connections to their main offices as secure as if they were in the main office.

www.tp-link.com

 

[Tech Junky]

@Avery

Back when I was looking into splitting functions / multi-wan ports to LAG more than one physical ETH port for over provisioned bandwidth I was looking at the ER devices as an option. They meet the criteria of flexible port assignments to either side LAN / WAN.

After some internal debate and frustration over finding exactly what I was looking for I decided to just build my own. All this stuff runs on Linux anyway when you get beyond the fancy GUI interfaces. Depending on budget and the desire to take on the project it wouldn't be that expensive to pull off. Since you're happy with a 100mbps connection on the WAN side using an onboard port on an old PC would be sufficient or add a 4-port 1GE card for $50. When I started off that's the route I went with before digging in deeper with more functions within the same case allowing me to collapse several functions into a single case from 5-6 external devices.

Just about any used PC on ebay would work for the project + the multiport NIC. Adding the LTE dongle or an internal card would be easy enough allowing external SMA antennae to be connected to get you outside and beyond the metal roof issue. I'd say this all could probably be done for ~$200 or less and beat just about any other options mentioned here. No need to pay for licensing on top of the HW costs . Running on Linux the box can add virtually any VPN option you want whether commercial or just to allow you into the network remotely.

 

[Avery]

Thanks for all the good thoughts. I ended up going with the peplink balance 20x, for simplicity and having a fully integrated solution with LTE failover built in. Right now, I am over committed on a remodel for time, so couldn't do something that requires more time. While it was more than I wanted to spend, I ultimately think it was the right decision for low effort, reliable hardware that basically fails over dropping just one packet during a ping test.

 

[Miner]

You are not going to find a RV345 for that cheap. You can find a RV340 for that. Trying to find a RV345p is going to be impossible as people still want them.

Evidently yes. A check at shopping.google.com (great for checking prices for things like this router) show prices for the RV345p at $795 and up. This is mid June 2022. 16 ports with eight of those ports doing PoE must be still be in demand.

 

[degrub]

Jest get a layer 3 POE ( or used injectors) switch to manage the LAN/wireless and buy the smaller non POE RV340.

 

[coxhaus]

Jest get a layer 3 POE ( or used injectors) switch to manage the LAN/wireless and buy the smaller non POE RV340.

I agree. It is what I do. I use a Cisco L3 switch with my RV340 router. It works well. I paid $160 for my RV340 new when they first came out. I don't use old enterprise Cisco L3 switches as they are too noisy and draw too much power. The Cisco enterprise equipment is built for wiring closets. I run Cisco small business L3 switches because they are quieter and built for home and small business. Not as good as the enterprise switches but good enough.