Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters?

2016-02-11 Thread Christopher Gray
o know what is offloaded. > > > > We stay with MT for routing. As it works and we are used to Winbox. Very > efficient. > > > > > > *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Josh Reynolds > *Gesendet:* Montag, 8. Februar 2016 16:33 > *An:* af@afmug

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters?

2016-02-11 Thread Josh Reynolds
speeds. >> >> >> >> Same is with UBNT offloading HW. You need to know what is offloaded. >> >> >> >> We stay with MT for routing. As it works and we are used to Winbox. Very >> efficient. >> >> >> >> >> >> *Von:* Af [

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters?

2016-02-08 Thread Stefan Englhardt
@afmug.com Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters? Does "use both" count? :) Mikrotik has a much better GUI for network operators. It's fast and informative and even works well on mobile. UBNT's is geared more to consumer-ish-es? :) MikroTik has a larger price range/variety. EdgeRouter

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters?

2016-02-08 Thread timothy steele
; Same is with UBNT offloading HW. You need to know what is offloaded. > > > > We stay with MT for routing. As it works and we are used to Winbox. Very > efficient. > > > > > > *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Josh Reynolds > *Gesendet:* Mon

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters?

2016-02-08 Thread Josh Reynolds
n one cpu and max it out. This does not mean the CCR cant >> forward higher speeds. >> >> >> >> Same is with UBNT offloading HW. You need to know what is offloaded. >> >> >> >> We stay with MT for routing. As it works and we are used to Win