Load sharing router > was going to use nexland isb but...

[stev0]

I was planning on using a Nexland router, specificially the ISB 800 Turbo, but I just recently noticed that Nexland was bought by Symantec, they claim to market a firewall that can be configured similar to these Nexland ISB routers, but I know very little about them. For those wondering, Symantech seems to be locking up the Nexland product line, only offering products to those that had them before the buy-out.

So basically I need a router with load sharing, I have two 1.5gb up/768mb down DSL lines that I am planning on using to power my new network but am lost now because of this little problem. Any of you know of any other routers that offer load sharing and are in the $500 price range? I would rather stay away from Cisco if at all possible, mainly price and because I'm not always going to be around to troubleshoot network problems, and a Cisco router is a bit over most peoples heads (especially the guys I work with )

Thanks all in advance

 

[JackMDS]

One Simple option for low load: Dual 10/100 WAN Router with 4 Port Switch.

However this might be a toy if you need it for Large Network.

Edimax makes Dual WAN Routers a s well.

:sun:

 

[stev0]

Originally posted by: JackMDS
One Simple option for low load: Dual 10/100 WAN Router with 4 Port Switch.

However this might be a toy if you need it for Large Network.

Edimax makes Dual WAN Routers a s well.

:sun:

I checked out that Edimax and found a number of reviews between the Edimax and a XiNCOM dual wan router.

If I picked up either of the two, paired it with a 16-24 port switch, would that be a decient setup for a medium sized home office? (the switch would be to service the entire house and all of it's ports plus the ports used in the office (8 roughly))

 

[JackMDS]

Yeah for 8 computers either will be OK.

 

[ToeJam13]

If this is going to be for an office environment, there may be a few better options out there.


Netopia makes a product called the "R-Series Router" which incorporates M-PPP (Multilink Point-to-Point). Unlike most load-sharing devices which balance on a per-socket basis, M-PPP evenly distributes on a per-packet basis. Upsides are more evenly distributed load over your DSL lines, and load-distribution for individual sockets. Downsides are high price, and ISP requirements (must support M-PPP).

Info can be found here.


F5 Networks makes a product called the "Link Controller" which load-balances connections across several WAN/DSL connections, even if those connections are of differing media or from different ISPs. It has a bunch of QoS (quality of service) metrics it uses, such as speed, dropped packets, price-per-MB-per-ISP, ect. It also works on the inbound, so if you're hosting a website, you can route customers to the proper DSL line without the expense of T1s running BGP. Upsides are ISP redundancy, infinate load-sharing, and the ability to work with both outbound and inbound requests. Downsides are very high price, and inability to distribute a heavy connection over an idle line.

Info can be found here.