if they own this router and this is what you suspect the issue is YOU have no responsibility until THEY have contacted the vendor of their router for support. The EBR 2310 was nice because it had a log message that flat out said unable to establish new connections. If you are prepared to own their problem, then log into their router to see if there is a similar log. we havent seen this problem since we went to offering a free airrouter, 30 bucks and you dont have to deal with them anymore, if theyre exceeding the capability of that then your TOS should have verbage regarding disruptive network activities, which exceeding that capability has a good potential to be disruptive
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, there is an option in the 13.2 (build 34) firmware that allows you >> > to bump up the NAT table to 8096 (not to mention that you can now watch > it via SNMP). > > I'm not doing NAT in the SM. > > > -----Original Message----- From: Bill Prince via Af > Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 7:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] home router max simultaneous connections > > > A Mikrotik will hold many, many thousands of connections. Don't know > what the limit is, but I have seen tens of thousands of connections in > the connections list. > > Also, there is an option in the 13.2 (build 34) firmware that allows you > to bump up the NAT table to 8096 (not to mention that you can now watch > it via SNMP). > > bp > > On 10/22/2014 5:29 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote: > >> I have a complaining customer who I’m becoming convinced is exceeding the >> NAT connection table in their router. Can I trust the numbers here: >> >> http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/lanwan/router-charts/bar/77-max-simul-conn >> >> This would indicate a mid-range route like a typical N600 probably >> supports around 4,000 connections. I'm not sure why this is, if you look >> at the RAM specs for any of these routers, it doesn't seem like a technical >> limitation, it's almost like they are artificially limiting the connections >> by price for marketing reasons. But I think this customer has something >> like a Netgear WNDR3400. >> >> Anyway, am I barking up the wrong tree, or is this a possible or even >> fairly common situation? I don't see any evidence this customer is doing >> Torrents, but there seem to be a lot of TCP connections, and a lot of apps >> that seem to have 4-10 or more connections open. Including Pandora, not >> sure why Pandora would need so many connections. >> >> Please note, the SM is bridged, I am not doing NAT in the SM. >> >> Is there any way to prove this other than give them a Mikrotik? >> >> And on a Mikrotik, can I tweak the UDP/TCP timeouts to flush out idle >> connections faster? Seems like even with infinite memory, there are only >> 65K possible ports for NAT/PAT and you would run into port exhaustion. >> >> >> > > -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
