RickG wrote:
Dave,
Thanks for the explanation. Really, my clients want to improve their
browsing speed. Of course, like most people, they associate speed with
speed test website such as speakeasy, etc.
In order to improve speed you need lower RTT and less congestion/packet
loss on any given
Thanks Matt! Yes, the first thing I did was set up my own speed test
site on net.
On 1/22/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RickG wrote:
Dave,
Thanks for the explanation. Really, my clients want to improve their
browsing speed. Of course, like most people, they associate speed with
This has been the case for me. Everyone wants a unique connection to
the net in case of an outage.
Not to beat a dead horse but back to the load-sharing question:
According to the responses I'm getting is that load sharing wont work.
So, why do I find so many article sayign it does such as
RickG wrote:
According to the responses I'm getting is that load sharing wont work.
So, why do I find so many article sayign it does such as
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=13103 ?
Depends on your definition of load-balancing. Traditionally, that means
you can balance traffic
Dave,
Thanks for the explanation. Really, my clients want to improve their
browsing speed. Of course, like most people, they associate speed with
speed test website such as speakeasy, etc.
-RickG
On 1/21/07, David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RickG wrote:
According to the responses I'm
19, 2007 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dual-WAN routers
Juat catching up on the list after a busy couple of weeks. So, are we
saying that all the products that claim load balancing dont work? I
can testify that the auto-failover works but the load sharing seems to
make things slower not faster
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dual-WAN routers
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, David E. Smith wrote:
This is for the end user cpe side. I'd like to see both fail-over and
load balancing but fail-over is priority. No need for wireless. I'll
look into the microtik. Thanks! -RickG
Rick, keeping in mind that load
Another thing for my RD department! Thanks! -RickG
On 1/7/07, Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, David E. Smith wrote:
This is for the end user cpe side. I'd like to see both fail-over and
load balancing but fail-over is priority. No need for wireless. I'll
look into
Happy New Year!
Hey, I've been testing Dual-WAN routers. I've used Xincom, Linksys,
D-Link. The Linksys seems to be most reliable because it has a health
check feature. Has anyone out there tried anything else?
-RickG
Palm Beach Broadband
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
NO EXPERIENCE, BUT AN INTERESTING ARTICLE TO READ AT
http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2004/0913rev.html
CHUCK
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 12:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Dual
RickG wrote:
Hey, I've been testing Dual-WAN routers. I've used Xincom, Linksys,
D-Link. The Linksys seems to be most reliable because it has a health
check feature. Has anyone out there tried anything else?
Are you just looking for redundancy (i.e. automatic failover so if one
ISP or
: Saturday, January 06, 2007 12:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Dual-WAN routers
Happy New Year!
Hey, I've been testing Dual-WAN routers. I've used Xincom, Linksys,
D-Link. The Linksys seems to be most reliable because it has a health check
feature. Has anyone out there tried anything
David,
This is for the end user cpe side. I'd like to see both fail-over and
load balancing but fail-over is priority. No need for wireless. I'll
look into the microtik. Thanks! -RickG
On 1/6/07, David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RickG wrote:
Hey, I've been testing Dual-WAN routers.
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, David E. Smith wrote:
This is for the end user cpe side. I'd like to see both fail-over and
load balancing but fail-over is priority. No need for wireless. I'll
look into the microtik. Thanks! -RickG
Rick, keeping in mind that load balancing where you don't control
both
(net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From:
Bo
Hamilton
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:05 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Dual WAN Routers
Hello fellow list dwellers!
I'm in the market for a dual WAN
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Bo Hamilton wrote:
I'm in the market for a dual WAN router. Could I get some feedback
on the some that you guys and gals are using. I have some clients
using me as a backup for their T1's, so Im just trying to find out
wich one's are the best to go with.
Mikrotik with
] Dual WAN Routers
Hello fellow list dwellers!
I'm in the market for a dual WAN router. CouldI get some
feedback on the some that you guys and gals are using. I have some
clients using me as a backup for their T1's, so Im just trying to find out wich
one's are the bestto go
If you are familiar with RouterOS a routerboard 500 would do the trick
and only run you about $175
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Dylan Oliver wrote:
You might check Peplink.com http://Peplink.com for its Balance
products -
http://www.peplink.com/productsLoader.php?productName=balance
Thanks everyone for all the feedback!!!
Bo
On 6/19/06, Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are familiar with RouterOS a routerboard 500 would do the trickand only run you about $175
Sam Tetherow Sandhills WirelessDylan Oliver wrote: You might check Peplink.com http://Peplink.com for
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bo HamiltonSent: Monday, June 19, 2006 9:05 AMTo:
WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Dual WAN
Routers
Hello fellow list dwellers!
I'm in the market for a dual WAN router. CouldI get some
feedback on the some that you guys and gals are using. I have some
Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mac DearmanSent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:03 AMTo:
'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Dual WAN
Routers
Bo,
I would use a
MikroTik box
Unlesss your doing BGP/OSPF or something fancy, might want to check out
www.hotbrick.com ~$250. You can configure some nice little things(email
alert, universal client on LAN, services 'binding', desired
loadbalancing %, etc.)in a matter of minutes that would take
considerably longer on a
22 matches
Mail list logo
