Yipee! My first router :)

vbimport

#1

I’ve wanted to setup a FTP and web server for awhile now so I’m about to make my first router purchase. I think I’ve decided on getting the D-Link DI-624 802.11g (108Mbps) router.
I don’t have need for wireless at the moment but since I’m going to be buying a router anyway I thought it wouldn’t hurt to spend a few extra dollars and get it incase I need it in the future (I’m thinking of getting a laptop eventually). I have a few questions that I couldn’t find definite answers for and would appreciate any insight.

  1. Since initially I’m not going to be using any wireless capabilities and would rather avoid unnecessary security risks, can I turn off the wireless so that no one can use it?
  2. For wireless g speeds, does this router really perform faster than most other routers in its class? Of course I heard the 108Mbps claim. I’m not so much worried about that as I am about good speeds at far distances (150 feet for example).
  3. Would you pick this router over Linksys and SMC’s similar models? If not why?

TIA! :slight_smile:


#2

DLink has a fairly poor reputation for reliability, which I can attest to.
I had a Linksys, which died a premature death, was replaced by a DLink which could not hold a connection to save itself.

The Netgear that replaced the Dlink has been as solid as can be, not so much as a blip for almost 2 years continuous operation.

As to wireless, I’ve heard they tend to be slow for networking, but adequate for internet connections.


#3

But this is a ‘g’. I’ve been using the original ‘b’ for the past 3 years, and I can attest, it’s unbearable, esp. since I was used to my 100 Mbps wired links. So going for ‘g’ is definitely a good move. :iagree: Dunno how well ‘g’ will work, whether it actually functions at 10x the speed of ‘b’ or if that’s some theoretical maximum that would hardly be hit. I’ve never used ‘g’, so I can’t tell you much. :sad: Wireless is also pretty taxing on the CPU, unlike the wired links. Dunno if this is the result of the old ‘b’ protocol and if ‘g’ is better.

As for D-Link, my only experience with them is the ‘b’ adapter I use in my laptop. Haven’t given me any problems. No idea how their wireless switches are.


#4

I have that exact same router. I must disaggree with rdgrimes however, so far I replaced crappy ass Linksys which Cisco bought over and made only slightly better on many occasions by D-Link for many friends and companies where I worked.

D-Link introduced Static DHCP and MAC Filtering while Linksys couldn’d even figure out how to even get DMZ to work, and to this day, it DOESN’T. Their techical staff knew less than I did even in my beginning stage of networking and I was always transferred to Level 3 technical support who basically told me I did everything they would normally recommend… bla bla bla and that they would note it in their records and it would be investigated.

Linksys is a POS in my opinion and the D-Link DI-624 I love to this very day, and I recomment it to all my friends.

The only reason anyone gets a Linksys nowadays is for installing LINUX on it via the firmware hack and running a free cheap server, FTP, HTTP, etc… server 24/7. If you want more info I got links.

Good luck with the new router you will not regret it Ssseth… and don’t hesitate to ask me anything, I know it like the back of my hand.


#5

I would pick an old PC with a few NICs (two for eth, and one for WLAN) and run an firewall distribution on it such as m0n0wall or a whole operating system such as OpenBSD/FreeBSD. Nothing fancy but it’s probably the most flexible and reliable solution around for small amount of money.
http://m0n0.ch/wall/
D-Link is in general known to make very poor WLAN-products so you probably want to go for Linksys/Netgear, nothing I would really recommend but it’s your choice. Hacking Linksys-firmwares isn’t something that I would recommend to a newbie (you can easily kill your router) and they dont feature a fast cpu to begin with. Visit www.seattlewireless.net for more information.
//Danne


#6

Where do you get your information from?

i am curious to see sources that deciphered this conclusion regarding D-Link. have you seen their latest firmware?

Have you even seen or heard of the review they got…
notice pic below with PC Magazine article attached

That was in 2002 and they have been top notch and had not WLAN problems AFAIK and I set quite a few up in clients offices with no compalints till given day.


#7

I base it on user feedback and personal experience.
D-Link is known to make cheap and unreliable products that hasn’t gone through decent testing before hitting the market. Just look at the DI-604, how many firmwares haven’t they released to fix functions that obviously should have worked fine right for the start? I can tell you that it’s not one or two…
PC Mags in general are pretty poor when it comes to reviewing, they often test just the obvious like if it works at all and spends most of the time talking about the gui (which is not as important as operation) and the looks. If you’re lucky they might even test throughput but never reliablity. Just feed it with 100-200 tcp connections and it’ll choke badly, not to mention the memory leakage which makes the gui inaccessable after ~2 months of operation. This is not a rare issue, it’s very common not just with D(e)-Link but with other low-end routers.
Buying for D-Link’s WLAN products is like begging for trouble, they work poorly and are very unstable in general. I’ve also come across hardware incompatibilites with plain common hardware. I mean, why wouldn’t a WLAN card work along with a SB Live! sound card?
//Danne


#8

Hate to say it, but most of the consumer grade routers out there have been pretty spotty since the mad rush to get 802.11g products to market. Most of the problems seem to be QC rather than technology related.

Give the DSL Reports Hardware Forum a visit to get an idea of what might be best for you.

Personally, my last three home routers have been Netgears and have all run flawlessly, but the Netgear forum at DSL Reports is as full of ticked off customers as D-Link’s and Linksys’.


#9

btw, if you want to run a ftp and web server you might as well use the comp for routing/firewalling too. I can help you out with basic setup if you want to give FreeBSD a try.
//Danne


#10

You are absolutely right, but upon more diligent review, most D-Link updates were/are updated features (those that Linksys lacked then and only recently implemented) and only some were bug fixes.

I advise you to look through revision history on any Linksys, almost ALL bug fixes, hardley any added features. People forget that one. :wink:


#11

IP Time’s my best source for routers.

http://www.kbench.com/hardware/?no=24990&pcategory=1&section=3

But South Korean routers are more optimized for FTTH and VDSL than for wireless. Wireless is more practical in less populated places like North America and Australia.

Samsung Mall once sold it for less than US$50 but now it’s US$100.


#12

Without hitting the insanely high price range for hi-end (hi-speed) routers I’d say that the WRAP (PC Engine)/Soekris solutions are decent for a hi-speed connection (~40-50mbit/s).
//Danne


#13

Hmm that’s an interesting generalization that I would like to refute.
I own a DI-604 broadband router and a DWL-900AP wireless access point.
I have never experienced an inaccessable GUI and I’ve been running it for over a year and a half.
I can confirm that the initial, original firmware that was loaded on the 604 was buggy and required constant reboots (of the router) to reenable an internet connection.
However, after a quick firmware update, it has been functioning flawlessly for me.
The wireless access point is decent. I don’t usually have any connectivity problems but I can say that it does not have the best range.

I would definitely recommend a Dlink router due to their low cost and multitude of features.
A few of the features I use succesfully on my router:
VPN pass through.
Virtual FTP Server service.
Virtual Radmin service. (customized service)


#14

The fact is still there, feed it with many tcp connections (you’ll have many if you’re running a webserver) and it’s choke and if your D-Link products works, congrats! It’s not often that happens.
//Danne


#15

My own low-end router seems to work alright for more than a year. D-Link is more expensive than that but Linksys is even more expensive, but I’m only talking about South Korean prices. :slight_smile:

The largest South Korean internet company is KT. The company has been national for a long time like NTT and British Telecom but is going on privatization these days. KT recently announced they believe using routers for xDSL and FTTH is illegal so they want to cut the lines for those customers unless they are paid more. KT said 5% of the IP-sharing users of KT internet lines are consuming 95% of KT’s traffic. That means those who just use one PC at home and browse web and use emails from time to time should pay US$1 a month and those who use more than one computer and run the systems 24x7 have to pay US$400 a month. One of the biggest reasons KT is trying that to the over 10 million KT broadband subscribers is that most other countries in the West seem to charge basing on the time and bandwidth. It was a revolutionary progress to abolish that in South Korea with the massive introductions of ADSL and HFC cable in the late 1990s. The South Korean government wanted to accelerate the shift to FTTH- or optical-based national infrastructure so earnestly that the newest apartments got “A-grade Super-High-Speed” signs when they are equipped with at least 100Mbps hubs in every household, making it as easy as plugging refrigerators and TV sets into the wall to use the high-speed internet for children and Jubu (usually housekeeping wives and mothers who control the domestics). Naturally, the strongest opposition is coming from the many router manufacturers, but it’ll be KT and MIC that decide their collective fates. KT had been part of MIC actually and they still share the same headquarter building in Gwanghwamun, Seoul, right next to the Gyobo building.


#16

I got this router for 50$ open box…i know its kind of a cheap brand but for the price it has great performance as a switcher and range much better than my linsys was before it died on me…
http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0156775

I used to have netgear routers too and they worked well for me also.


#17

I’m curious…Why would you run a webserver over a wireless link in the first place? That makes little sense to me. I can see huge security issues, plus a much higher possibility of issues related to RFI.

100-200 connections seems to be heavy use for a home-level wireless product. I could see why any model of basic home router would have issues.


#18

only reason i run my web server through my cable router is no maintenance fees :stuck_out_tongue: more of a hobby than a actual web server as speeds will never be what they are on a real server…also i dont see many security issues with only opening one port.


#19

@ LoneWolfe15
Where did I state that it was going to run on WLAN? The topic stater wanted to host a ftp server and a http server not necessarily using WLAN (not that it would matter on a consumer connection). What security issues are they running a webserver on WLAN apart from the security issues of WLAN itself? You can overcome most of them by running a VPN on top of the bulk encryption for instance including regular WLAN safety precautions. 100-200 tcp connections are not that much. If you host an image gallery or just a regular website/forum you can easily get peaks like that. By default most http clients are set to use 2 connections per server and that leaves us at about 100 simultaneous users excluding your own connections. P2P software uses about 30 or more (depending of network), BitTorrent uses at least 50, perferably 100+ for instance (hence why many have issues with BitTorrent using dirtcheap routers excluding the shaping/QoS issues). Websurfing probably peaks at 30 including a few downloads. Games uses a few ports, as you can see it’s not very “heavy use”.
//Danne