We're about to replace an RB493AH with an X86 box at one tower where
it's (the 493) running out of gas. We have an RB1100 (NOT the
RB1100AHx2) that's been sitting on a shelf for over a year because of
the problems with eth12 & eth13.
Have you compared the 1100 versus the RB1100AHx2?
bp
On 6/15/2012 1:30 PM, Simon Westlake wrote:
I have a mix of RB1100 x2AH in towers along with some x86 boxes for
larger towers. The big benefit of the RB1100 x2AH is that it has a
much better operating temperature range than any x86 box you're going
to be able to affordably put together.
So far, I only have three RB1100 x2AH deployed but they are working
very well (they replaced RB493s with similar issues, couldn't process
the needed amount of packets.) I have about 35 RB450/493 deployed and
5 x86 boxes in towers. We'll be using the RB1100x2AH for the future, I
think.. until they get squashed and we need something bigger. Some of
the locations they are at are sitting at 100f+ inside the box and they
are still rocking along.
On 6/15/2012 11:40 AM, Troy Settle wrote:
Curious as to other people's experiences with the 493AH. I have a
site that
needs to push up to about 20Mbit/s and run 150-200 simple queues.
It's been
working fine until we added the queues, then it started dropping
packets all
over the place. I guess we just overwhelmed it?
Looking at the RB1100AH as a replacement, but should we consider
going up to
an x86 based router?
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
