Re: do i need a new router

Leythos wrote:
> In article <433cfddf$1@mail.netspeed.com.au>, bellyup@the.bar says...
>
>>>If I wanted a firewall, I would pick a WatchGuard first and always.
>>
>>I used to lean that way, until the X edge series which were problematic
>>on stub networks using PPPOE. (they had no awareness that PPPOE added 8
>>bytes and would cause connection failures by sending out 1508 byte
>>packets, meaning you had to adjust the ethernet MTU on all client
>>workstations.)
>
>
> I've always set the MTU on DSL type connections to 1400 or 1430, never
> found one that worked at 1500 yet.

It was a 'known' bug with some X models that had (at the time) no cure
from the vendor.
Most generic models default to 1492, taking the max to 1500, and
therefore working (in most cases)

> I did not have to make any changes at
> the client/workstation/server level, only at the WAN interface.

Lucky for you ;-)

>
>
>>Also you can do similar with open source on fairly low spec boxes and
>>get similar, if not better levels of protection, for a much lower cost.
>
>
> Yes, but most businesses don't want a no-name solution that is setup in
> some uncertified manner with some generic computer parts - regardless of
> how well it's built.
>
Comes down to your target market. I work in small organisations where $$
is a large factor. If they want a content-filtering firewall and the
choice is to pay for 4 hours labour to build it and an old box, or
nearly $12k in costs, subs and add-on fees, you can guess which path
they will take.

Funnily enough, if either solution explodes, you can have another OS box
in place the same day it goes rather than waiting 2-3 days for a vendor
to ship a replacement and reactivate the feature sets for the new serial
number.

Your most important point there was the 'certified' component.
E.
Received on Sat Oct 15 04:35:42 2005