Can CISCO 837 with 4 Ethernet port be used as an alternative? Would I be able to aggregate providers with the 4 LAN ports on it? 837 also has a DSL port. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps380/ps4874/product_data_sheet09186a008010e5c5.html
Thanks,Bruce > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > CC: [email protected]; [email protected] > Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:28:13 -0500 > Subject: RE: [on-asterisk] Router Recommendations > > > Drew, > > > > Thanks a lot for weighing in on this. I appreciate it. I was almost buying > WIC-4ESW. > > > > This could also affect the aggregated speed if I use a WIC-1ADSL because that > is yet on another VLAN. > > > > However, the route is to support 40 Aastra phone only (with SIP trunking to > outside) and maybe 10mbps is going to work (no computer on the network) but I > would like a more solid solution in case of expansion. Is there any other of > the Cisco router which would do 100mbps at a reasonable price that you can > recommend? Please remember the multi-wan requirement. > > > > If worse comes to worse and no options I may drop the RJ-11 requirement and > not use Bell at all. > > > > Thanks, > > Bruce > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:05:23 -0500 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Router Recommendations > > > > I've used the WIC-4ESW in the past. > > > > You can assign each of the ports to a different VLAN to create up to 4 > > more routed ethernet interfaces. However, despite each switchport being > > 100Mb, the interface between the WIC-4ESW and the router is only 10Mb. > > > > Traffic between switchports on the same VLAN will be 100Mb but traffic > > between VLANS will be seriously limited as it has to pass through the > > 10Mb pipe to the router twice. > > > > In Bruce's scenario, traffic would not pass between switchports but > > aggregate Internet bandwidth would be limited to around 6Mb (10Mb in > > theory only). > > > > regards, > > > > Drew > > > > > > > > Bill Sandiford wrote: > > > To my knowledge the only Ethernet WICs available for the 1721 are the > > > WIC-1ENET which is single 10BaseT only. > > > > > > Do not confuse WIC-4ESW to be a 4 port Ethernet card either. It is a 4 > > > port Ethernet switch. It does however support 802.1q vlan trunking, so it > > > may be possible to separate the ports that way using subinterfaces and > > > vlans. Keep in mind however that PPPoE is not supported on subinterfaces, > > > but I believe DHCP is. (translation for cisco laymen...you won't be able > > > to use the WIC-4ESW ports for PPPoE connections like DSL, but you may be > > > able to use it for DHCP connections like Cable and/or satellite) > > > > > > I know someone who inadvertently bought a WIC-4ESW thinking it would work > > > for them. I'll see if they still have it and if they do I'll try and do > > > some testing with it (as time permits). > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > From: Bruce N [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 2:08 AM > > > To: Bill Sandiford; [email protected]; asterisk Mailing > > > Subject: RE: [on-asterisk] Router Recommendations > > > > > > Sounds like a really solid/resonably priced option. > > > > > > Cisco 1721 has a one 10/100 Fast Ethernet Port. > > > > > > I am looking to use this as a load balancer for three ISPs if it's > > > possible with this router. Providers are: > > > > > > Bell (ADSL) - RJ-11 interface = WIC-1ADSL > > > Rogers - RJ-45 interface = ? > > > Sattalite - RJ-45 interface = ? > > > POE Switch - RJ-45 interface = ? > > > > > > So, in total 3 RJ-45 and 1 ADSL port is needed. I can live with 3 RJ-45 > > > and no ADSL ports as well. Supporting 100mbps on all RJ-45 ports would > > > definitely be a bonus. > > > > > > I know that the router has two WIC slots. WIC-1ADSL exists as Bill > > > suggested. Is there another WIC which can support two 10/100Base RJ-45 > > > base in the other WIC slot? Or maybe even a one port 10/100Base? > > > > > > The reason why I am posing this question is because I only found a one > > > port 10Base WIC module on the list of compatible modules for this router > > > and no 100Base WICs. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > >> From: [email protected] > > >> To: [email protected]; [email protected] > > >> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 23:02:59 -0500 > > >> Subject: RE: [on-asterisk] Router Recommendations > > >> > > >> I currently have a WRT54GL in my home running the MLPPP version of > > >> Tomato, and it is pretty solid but does lock up from time to time. The > > >> lockups aren't to troublesome in my home situation, but would be > > >> annoying in a business environment. > > >> > > >> We found the same thing in the field for most of the readily available > > >> routers, whether they be Linksys, D-Link, Buffalo or otherwise. Most of > > >> the time they were pretty good, but in certain circumstances they just > > >> locked up, or wouldn't reconnect PPPoE after an outage, or other weird > > >> stuff. > > >> > > >> For that reason, we are now solely deploying Cisco 1721 routers for all > > >> of our business customer deployments (whether they use VoIP or not). You > > >> can pick them up on eBay from a variety of sources for< $100. I think we > > >> bought 100 of them for $50 each. Then we put the WIC-1ADSL card into the > > >> router (they are also around $50 on eBay). In some cases we put in 2 DSL > > >> cards and bond the links with MLPPP. > > >> > > >> The great part of this solution is that for around $100 (for the single > > >> DSL, or $150 for dual) we get a router that runs Cisco IOS and all the > > >> great things that come along with that. The reliability is outright > > >> awesome...they just never need to be rebooted. > > >> > > >> The downside is no web interface, so you have to know Cisco IOS or be > > >> fairly comfortable with a command-line interface. Also, there is no > > >> wireless in this series of routers, so you will need some sort of > > >> stand-alone AP if the customer wants wireless (most of them do). > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Bill > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Wai Vii [mailto:[email protected]] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 6:06 PM > > >> To: TAUG Technical > > >> Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Router Recommendations > > >> > > >> Another vote for Tomato, the traffic shaping works great whereas it > > >> just seemed to cause problems with DD-WRT. Used to have DD-WRT loaded > > >> on up to ten WRT54GS but found it slower than Tomato and the interface > > >> more cumbersome. > > >> > > >> Another vote for the ASUS routers mentioned. Heard that the Buffalo > > >> routers are OK too but I've never used one before. If you want to > > >> spend a bit more, consider Soekris or Routerboard. > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> > > >> > > > ________________________________ > > > Tell the whole story with photos, right from your Messenger window. Learn > > > how!<http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9706112> > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > _________________________________________________________________
