mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
| reply to bassetts
Re: Zyxel wireless router with FIOS 5meg/2meg
said by bassetts  :Is there a low end zyxel router that can handel the 5meg/2meg speed with the sp firewall on? I know the zywall 5 but that is a little much. I am not sure that any of the ZyXEL Router products -- regardless of class -- actually provide support for High-Speed Routing throughput using Fiber Optic service for the home ---- or as it is properly know --- Fiber To The Home service [FTTH] ... it would be worth while to get ZyXEL to clarify this specific type of service as being properly supported in its product line.
The only Router that I am familiar with that does specifically provide support for FIOS [FTTH] is made by Buffalo called the WZR-G108 Router which Router incorporates Airgo Networks True MIMO technology.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
1 edit | I think even the FTTH uses a ethernet connection whether you have to logon with a PPPoE system or you are assigned a static IP or use DHCP for the WAN port IP address the ZyWall5/35/70 will connect and handle the throughput of that service. Not sure for the lower end models, as far as throughput, but all should still be able to connect to the ISP.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
1 edit | said by Shootist :I think even the FTTH uses a ethernet connection whether you have to logon with a PPPoE system or you are assigned a static IP or use DHCP for the WAN port IP address the ZyWall5/35/70 will connect and handle the throughput of that service. Not sure for the lower end models, as far as throughput, but all should still be able to connect to the ISP. The issue is not the ability to connect to the ISP ... no problem whatsoever connecting ---- the ISSUE Mr. SHOOTIST is QoS and how the bandwidth is exploited for different classes of traffic ... perhaps you should not shoot so fast or as far as you have with your unbridled enthusiasm for speculation. 
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business |
|
dslpartner
join:2005-02-18
2 edits | said by mozerd :The issue is not the ability to connect to the ISP ... no problem whatsoever connecting ---- the ISSUE Mr. SHOOTIST is QoS and how the bandwidth is exploited for different classes of traffic ... perhaps you should not shoot so fast or as far as you have with your unbridled enthusiasm for speculation. So what does this actually mean then?
said by mozerd :I am not sure that any of the ZyXEL Router products -- regardless of class -- actually provide support for High-Speed Routing throughput using Fiber Optic service for the home ---- or as it is properly know --- Fiber To The Home service [FTTH] ... it would be worth while to get ZyXEL to clarify this specific type of service as being properly supported in its product line. The only Router that I am familiar with that does specifically provide support for FIOS [FTTH] is made by Buffalo called the WZR-G108 Router which Router incorporates Airgo Networks True MIMO technology. I see no mention of QoS in your first statement, to me it looks you think FTTH got some special thing (interface?) that needs to be supported on the device you connect to it.
Its all about what kind of protocols you use for transferring the data and your Buffalo Device does not do anything else than Ethernet over standard 100Base-TX, there is no mention of any special Fiber ports, like the Allied RG600 series can do.
And from my interpretation of the info in the link you provided, its just marketing speak saying that this box got enough oomph to not slow down your FTTH connection.
And if you mean its about QoS, what kind of special FTTH QoS stuff do you belive the Buffalo device got, that makes it work better than other devices?
--
The real downside of GIT may be that _my_ way of doing things is quite possibly very rare. But it clearly is the only right way. The fact that everybody else does it some other way only means that they are wrong. -Linus |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| reply to mozerd
said by mozerd :said by Shootist :I think even the FTTH uses a ethernet connection whether you have to logon with a PPPoE system or you are assigned a static IP or use DHCP for the WAN port IP address the ZyWall5/35/70 will connect and handle the throughput of that service. Not sure for the lower end models, as far as throughput, but all should still be able to connect to the ISP. The issue is not the ability to connect to the ISP ... no problem whatsoever connecting ---- the ISSUE Mr. SHOOTIST is QoS and how the bandwidth is exploited for different classes of traffic ... perhaps you should not shoot so fast or as far as you have with your unbridled enthusiasm for speculation. OK I have reviewed this thread and see NO mention of QoS in any shape or form except for your last post, I.E. the one I quoted. Just what seems to be your problem as I see no unbridled enthusiasm for speculation on my part. My comments were to your statement,
said by mozerd :I am not sure that any of the ZyXEL Router products -- regardless of class -- actually provide support for High-Speed Routing throughput using Fiber Optic service for the home ---- or as it is properly know --- Fiber To The Home service [FTTH] ... it would be worth while to get ZyXEL to clarify this specific type of service as being properly supported in its product line. Which again mentions nothing about QoS and just how do you know NONE of the Zyxel routers handle this correctly with the FTTH service. I think you may need some sleep and a few shots of alcohol to kill that bug.
Really have a nice day.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
DavidJWood
Premium
join:2001-10-12
UK
| reply to mozerd
Whilst I won't word it in the same way as others, I do wish to join in on the questioning as to why FTTH needs any kind of special support.
Verizon's FiOS, probably the most common FTTH system at the moment, is an EPON system - Ethernet over PON. There's no ATM involved in these systems, which is one reason why they're relatively cheap to implement. What's so special on the CPE side of a FTTH install that needs special support in a router, especially in an FTTH system that is based around Ethernet?
I could accept that higher speed connections potentially need different optimisation to get the best from them compared to the lower speed WAN connections most of us are used to. I can also accept, to an extent, that different provider's networks may require different optimisation to get the best from them - though that is not necessarily linked to the underlying technology in use.
However, that's different to what seems to be being claimed in this thread, which is that all existing routers lacking a certain technology are unsuitable for FTTH use.
Once the presentation is Ethernet (give or take PPPoE or similar), routers have so far worked pretty much the same whether the underlying connection is cable, ADSL, SDSL, T1/E1, frame relay or a direct Ethernet connection in the likes of a co-lo. I'm finding it a little hard to believe FTTH changes this so fundamentally, though am willing to be educated if I'm wrong.
Overall, can we have some facts and/or references, please? Bits of this thread have a hint of "I know what I'm talking about, you don't, so go away". At the very least, I want to be in a position to separate marketing bluster from true technical advantage, and this thread leaves me anywhere except that at the moment.
To take what I believe is a somewhat parallel issue, my views over TRUE MIMO, WE HAVE THE BEST MIMO EVER and NEW UPDATED TRUE MIMO - BUY NOTHING ELSE AS IT'S NOT WORTHY OF BEING CALLED MIMO (and all the other marketing that is around on 'next generation wireless LAN' products) differs from others that have posted in this thread. Yes - I accept that there are some potential technical and even real world advantages in many of these products. However, at the moment, what we have is a mass of non-standards, where not even all the products using the same chipset have the same wireless feature set, and the chipset vendors are updating and upgrading those feature sets all the time.
Frankly, I can't be bothered with it. I don't want to spend a fortune to land up with the wireless equivalent of Video 2000 or Betamax - products that may be technically superior, but don't win out in the race to become a standard and for which support disappears all too quickly. Whilst I know it's imperfect and not at the bleeding edge of technology, I'm sticking with 802.11g for now, especially as I've taken the conscious decision to wire the house, almost every device on my network is wired, and what use I make of wireless rarely needs high throughput. My installed wireless system does what I want and need it to, and I believe that nobody has the right to question that judgment.
Returning to the FTTH router situation, I believe my ZyWALL 35 should be powerful enough for many FTTH connections, including some of the faster products that are available. Should I be putting pressure on ZyXEL to add some features to the firmware so that I could make best use of FTTH in the future? Let's avoid one complication by assuming the FTTH is IPv4, not IPv6, based.
What I see in this thread is the suggestion that many of us are maybe giving the wrong advice to posters who already have FTTH by suggesting devices like the Z5 and Z35. If I'm amongst those giving misguided advice, I want to know why.
The FTTH Router mentioned in this thread is one for which I can find a statement on the vendor's product web page, which is, after all marketing - "High-Speed Routing Throughput (Supports FTTH)". This statement is repeated all around the web in the numerous web stores that sell that product. However, I can't find any reference as to what this technology is, what it does, or why it makes this product superior to all other routers. It sounds like so many of the other statements put around by marketers.
ZyXEL are not immune - they've been plugging Unified Threat Management like it's the best thing to hit networking for many years. When you understand it's a card you can slip into some ZyWALLs which gives you subscription router based IDP and AV, also there's a new subscription based AS service, you can then weigh whether it has value for you or not. Frankly, there's a lot of marketing guff got into networking these days, and I'm not sure it's helpful to anyone, much as I appreciate that the majority of consumers aren't in a position to weigh technical matters themselves and all companies want to do what they can to get market share.
I want to understand whether there's value in the Buffalo product beyond the marketing. Does it relate to a real technical advantage that other manufacturers should be looking at trying to emulate and surpass, or is it just a logo on a box to try to sell in what is likely to be a growth market?
David |
|
mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
| reply to dslpartner
No special Interface is required for FTTH -- There are many different way to process/mange packets being pumped through the pipe at the Routers WAN port – Efficiency in processing the packet stream(s) is highly dependent on the Type/Quality/Technology of the processor [or chain of co-processors] being utilized on the Router board.
On the Router’s Wan side FTTH does require much greater processor efficiency in managing the massive and varied data streams – and if the objective is to be able to properly enjoy simultaneous bandwidth-intensive applications such as high-definition video, Voice-over-IP (VoIP) telephony, streaming audio, and online gaming then QoS is inevitably tied-into the equation..
Airgo Networks have developed specific [and currently unique] hardware that implements superior processing chains to better exploit QoS and Security … and it so happens that Buffalo is using the built-in hardware advantage whereas Linksys, Belkin and Netgear have chosen not to do so as of yet – but that may change very shortly. On the Enterprise side SOHOware does fully exploit the Airgo advantage.
If your are sincerely interested in this area then consider Intel’s IXP technology as a clue to how dramatic improvements will be made in network processing technologies. Intel is a competitor to Airgo … Intel is Goliath while Airgo is little David. I am betting on little David.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business |
|
mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
| reply to DavidJWood
said by DavidJWood :What I see in this thread is the suggestion that many of us are maybe giving the wrong advice to posters who already have FTTH by suggesting devices like the Z5 and Z35. If I'm amongst those giving misguided advice, I want to know why. Which is why in my first post in this thread I suggested that it would be worth while to get ZyXEL to clarify this specific type of service as being properly supported in its product line.
And based on my field experience having dome many commercial installations the technology advantage that Airgo Networks provide is --- in crude terms --- the real deal.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
 ·SureWest Internet
| Wow, did I toss a grenade into this thread?
Allow me to remove "wireless" from my original question and rephrase as "What is a good Zyxel consumer router that can handle 20M/20M speed" and all it needs is Ethernet WAN interface (standard DHCP client or static IP). I'm not interested in a discussion on wireless. I'm interested in a relatively low cost Zyxel router capable of handling high WAN speeds. |
|
dslpartner
join:2005-02-18
| reply to mozerd
said by mozerd :If your are sincerely interested in this area then consider Intel’s IXP technology as a clue to how dramatic improvements will be made in network processing technologies. Intel is a competitor to Airgo … Intel is Goliath while Airgo is little David. I am betting on little David. Then I am sure you will be happy to know that the ZyXEL ZyWALL's uses Intel IXP processors and by your statements should be better than the airgo solution.
Then again I tought airgo only did WLAN.
--
The real downside of GIT may be that _my_ way of doing things is quite possibly very rare. But it clearly is the only right way. The fact that everybody else does it some other way only means that they are wrong. -Linus |
|
mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
| said by dslpartner :[A} Then I am sure you will be happy to know that the ZyXEL ZyWALL's uses Intel IXP processors and by your statements should be better than the airgo solution. [B] Then again I tought airgo only did WLAN. {A] Your creative extrapolation of my statements is certainly an embellishment of fact ... but, you are being creative. How IXP tech is exploited I assume escapes your insightful review as does you cursory knowledge of the work that Airgo Networks is advancing in the field of networking technologies.
[B] Review [A] and that certainly is That.
You are most welcome to your extrapolations.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| In all your post you still give NO explanation of how this FTTH service is any different from a normal ethernet connection and just how the Buffalo product and Airgo work better with FTTH then ANY OTHER make or model router. If a router can handle the throughput of the higher speed WAN connection just what makes the Buffalo and Airgo system better.
I think it is you that is extrapolating. And we're NOT talking wireless here.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| reply to bbarrera
said by bbarrera :Wow, did I toss a grenade into this thread? Allow me to remove "wireless" from my original question and rephrase as "What is a good Zyxel consumer router that can handle 20M/20M speed" and all it needs is Ethernet WAN interface (standard DHCP client or static IP). I'm not interested in a discussion on wireless. I'm interested in a relatively low cost Zyxel router capable of handling high WAN speeds. No not really. I think the grenade was tossed by mozerd .
To be honest I don't think anyone that has and can afford a 20M/20M connection would be using a lower end home style router. So you may not get a solid answer to that question. Just my thoughts, oh no there I go again with my unbridled enthusiasm for speculation. Please forgive me.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
dslpartner
join:2005-02-18
| reply to mozerd
I was just trying to debat the same way as you do.
I would still very much like to know what you think that buffalo device does that is better than any other device for FTTH.
In regards to my knowledge about Airgo, I just posted what I knew, I never claimed to know anything about Airgo. Which you claim to do, so I would really like to know why you think its the superior solution.
For the sage of argument if I had a 20M/20M internet connection, I would use a Cisco 3750 or something as my router, expensive yes, but I could write it of as a company expense.
--
The real downside of GIT may be that _my_ way of doing things is quite possibly very rare. But it clearly is the only right way. The fact that everybody else does it some other way only means that they are wrong. -Linus |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | reply to dslpartner
Yes, comparing Intel IXP processors with Airgo WLAN chips is comparing apples to oranges. David should consider a career in marketing. |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·SureWest Internet
| reply to mozerd
said by mozerd :I am not sure that any of the ZyXEL Router products -- regardless of class -- actually provide support for High-Speed Routing throughput using Fiber Optic service for the home ---- or as it is properly know --- Fiber To The Home service [ FTTH] ... it would be worth while to get ZyXEL to clarify this specific type of service as being properly supported in its product line. The only Router that I am familiar with that does specifically provide support for FIOS [FTTH] is made by Buffalo called the WZR-G108 Router which Router incorporates Airgo Networks True MIMO technology. Wow, are you saying that my successful use of a Zywall 70 as an interior router, where it delivers 40Mbps firewall throughput and bandwidth management, isn't enough to handle the lower speed 20M/20M FTTH service offered in my area? I couldn't find a single datasheet or technical review on the Buffalo product that showed firewall throughput. The Buffalo page focuses on MIMO with a quick unsubstantiated marketing blurb on FTTH. MIMO is unrelated to routing/firewall performance.
I know the Zywall 5/35/70 series is capable of handling the routing/firewall performance needed for FTTH. |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·SureWest Internet
| reply to Shootist
said by Shootist :To be honest I don't think anyone that has and can afford a 20M/20M connection would be using a lower end home style router. So you may not get a solid answer to that question. Just my thoughts, oh no there I go again with my unbridled enthusiasm for speculation. Please forgive me. The FTTH service in this area is priced same as DSL and Comcast cable modem service. The Surewest 20M/20M service is $49.99/month (1 year contract) and you have to buy in conjunction with either phone ($28/month) or digital TV ($47/month). My neighbors have 20M/20M and it is the real deal. |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA | Man send them to Georgia, $49.99 for 20M/20M + $28.00 phone is about the same as what I pay for 3M/384K from BS. But I ain't moven to the left coast.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | My biz class DSL is $70/month 2M/256K on a 3 year contract (biz class service, running servers).
Surewest offers 20M/20M ala carte (w/o phone or TV) for $90/month. |
|
Kirby Smith
join:2001-01-26
Derry, NH
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to DavidJWood
said by DavidJWood :Whilst I won't word it in the same way as others, I do wish to join in on the questioning as to why FTTH needs any kind of special support. Verizon's FiOS, probably the most common FTTH system at the moment, is an EPON system - Ethernet over PON. There's no ATM involved in these systems, which is one reason why they're relatively cheap to implement. What's so special on the CPE side of a FTTH install that needs special support in a router, especially in an FTTH system that is based around Ethernet? David Some here may wish to spend some time at the Verizon FiOS forum. There they will read that Verizon BPON (broadband PON) is APON (ATM PON) plus TV and voice spectrum additions. Agreed that to first order, the ATM aspect is irrelevant because the ONT converts the connection to standard Ethernet. Negotiation for up time slots and other ATM arcana is hidden from the user.
kirby |
|
