Thanks for the input on the RV042s Mike. It sounds like a pain to always be on the lookout for a condition that requires a reboot! Is there perhaps a watchdog timer provision in the system to automatically reboot if a ping attempt fails?
I am not familiar with the RV042s but I understand some WAN sharing devices simply alternate which modem picks up a request. This seems like a reasonable approach but I also understand that in some cases when a machine once connects it will always go out on the same WAN port. This would eliminate the possibility of a power user getting the benefit of both ports and probably mean that machines initially connected to a modem that goes offline would be unable to reach the Internet. Finally I understand there is a scheme when the data throughput is aggregated. This would seem to be the superior approach but I think it requires support from the ISP side. Joe On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Mike Copeland <[email protected]> wrote: > I've used around a dozen of the Cisco RV042 routers and they do have a few > shortcomings. I'm currently looking for an alternative. > > The problem with the RV042 (Cisco, or Linksys) that finally prompted me to > look elsewhere is that the built-in DHCP server limits the # of connections > to 50. > > I've also experienced lockups where for no obvious reason on a fairly > light work load, the router will have to be rebooted just because it went > out to lunch. > > And, just because it has the Cisco name on it, don't expect Cisco-quality > support...this is in their "Small Office" line up and the support is small, > too. > > I've also had it refuse connections from a specific IP when there are > multiple requests in too short a time frame. In other words if 10 or more > computers at one location reboot and try to reconnect to a server behind > the RV042, the RV042 may detect it as a synflood attack and refuse all > connections...until a reboot of the router, then it works fine. I went > round and round with several tiers of support techs at Cisco until the last > guy said "Sorry, you need a different router." > > Finally, the latest versions of both Chrome or Firefox browsers will not > let you connect to the router interface for configuration, because there is > a problem with the router's security certificate. You have to use IE or an > older version of Firefox. Not a deal breaker but annoying when things > aren't working and you are rushing around trying to figure out why. > > But, when the RV042 (or RV042G) work, they're really easy to set up, and I > usually pay around $110 through Amazon. > > Mike Copeland > > > Ted Roche wrote: > >> We've mentioned the LinkSys (now Cisco) RV042 on this forum before. >> Essentially, it's a router with two WAN ports. You can configure the >> routing to failover from one to the other on failure, or balance the >> traffic between the two, which should expand your internet bandwidth. >> >> This device is getting on in its years, as a 10/100 router, and is >> probably at a premium price, since it has the Cisco brand on it. But >> it looks like you could find it for under $100, and it might be worth >> trying out as an inexpensive solution. (There's also an updated >> Gigabit model RV042G for around $150.) >> >> >> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/rv042-dual-wan-vpn-router/index.html >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Joe Yoder <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I want to increase Internet access bandwidth on a network I manage. The >>> only unmetered broadband available in the area is DSL so my only option >>> appears to be a second DSL modem. Ideally the two modems would equally >>> share the load but I understand to do that properly requires a bonding >>> modem and possibly support by the ISP. >>> >>> It seems a simpler approach might be to split the traffic between the >>> terminal services server and the machines connected to the server. This >>> would mean that when a user accesses the Internet while in an RDP session >>> the traffic would go through the server modem. If the user accesses the >>> Internet from a browser running on the local machine, the traffic would >>> be >>> on the non server modem. >>> >>> My question relates to how one configures such a setup. Is it as simple >>> as >>> setting up the second modem with its own static IP address and using that >>> address as the gateway address for the server and leaving everything else >>> the same? Anything else? >>> >>> Thanks in advance for any input! >>> >>> Joe >>> >>> >>> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- >>> multipart/alternative >>> text/plain (text body -- kept) >>> text/html >>> --- >>> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cabqednwc+3qwtxpeg4doll1ya15s--r5wxpnulye4xxlvzj...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
