• randombullet@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    4 months ago

    I still don’t understand why this isn’t a 2.5G WAN and 2.5G LAN. Is it assuming that people are going to be using it as a router on a stick with a 1G WAN?

    • daddy32@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is link to CZ.NIC’s Turris offerings.

      They ship to “many countries” besides Czech republic, according to their page.

      The router itself is quite expensive at around 400 euros for the wifi model.

      In case it is not obvious, they are primarily Czech domain registrar.

  • bulwark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Just pulled the trigger, only had European plugs in stock. I’ve got adapters so np. I’m getting it to replace my Raspberry Pi router that I’ve been using for a few years.

    *Edit, I should say I’m a huge fan openWRT despite the fact that 15 years ago I managed to brick my linksys router so bad it actually caused sparks to shoot out the ethernet jacks. I flashed the wrong model firmware.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        The very example I provided comes with an mPCI-e slot to install a WiFi card of your choosing.

        Also they have SIM card slots so you can install a data SIM card and set-up a fallback configuration that switches to it if your landline internet connection goes down.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Of course. But this one comes with WiFi onboard and a case with antennas if you go for the clothed option.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yeah, the case with antennas is a good point - when I decided to concentrate various things in a Mini-PC in my living room (TV-Box, Router and so on) I actually looked into these router Mini-PCs as an option and the biggest problem was the lack of a proper antenna, so I ended up going with a generic Mini-PC and leaving out the router functionality which remains done by my old router (which is quite decent, just a bit outdated).

            Mind you, this one also wouldn’t work for me because I’m using 4 Ethernet ports (1 for the external connection and 3 internally) whilst this one only has 2 (a weird choice for a router).

            IMHO, this isn’t really better than just getting an SBC with 2 Ethernet ports and WiFi and put it in a box with an antenna), a setup which suffers from exactly the same problem as this one: not enough Ethernet ports.

  • 7dev7random7@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    GTFO, clicking on “buy now” two times results in some shop which has “aliexpress” as the official partner.

    This can’t be a product from the sources mentioned, can it?

  • perestroika@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    There are use cases for this router, but please don’t get the plastic clone sold by the same Chinese company that assembles the real thing. (The plastic clone costs a third, but doesn’t have detachable antennas and doesn’t accept mainstream OpenWRT because it uses an almost unknown CPU.)

    Myself, when I need a high capability router (for me “capability” typically means “range”) I turn towards a Raspberry Pi and Alfa AWUS1900 wireless card. Yes, it lacks in throughput (USB is a severe bottleneck)… but with a bit of tweaking, you can talk out to 2 kilometers if terrain allows. :)

      • Mad_Punda@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Well the router I use today has 4 ports (and a built in modem for that matter, but I don’t use that).
        I understand I can use a switch, but that means I’ll have to buy a switch in addition to this to replace my router.

        • Draghetta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          44
          ·
          4 months ago

          Which is not a bad thing, it’s more unix if you will. Router is a router, switch is a switch.

          You provide your own switch and you choose the features: port count, port speed, vlan, etc — or get a 10€ switch if you don’t care. When a port breaks you replace the switch alone.

          Multifunction tools are generally a tradeoff where you buy immediate convenience and pay with more ewaste and more money in the long run.

          • Mad_Punda@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            I have 3 but they’re not close to the router. (What I’m saying is: I’m likely target audience, but I don’t have an additional switch nearby, since so far any router I had also had a built in switch.)

            But yeah, I get it. Modularity makes sense for repairability.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yet for 98% of everyone else, you either need more than 4, or you only need one or two. You got a house full of proffesional gamers that can’t have an extra 15ms of latency?

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    4 months ago

    Isn’t RAM like the biggest bottleneck in routers causing bufferblaot and packet loss?

    How does the article not mention how much RAM this device has?

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Packet loss occurs when a router has to drop some packets because the buffer to store them is running out because the link where they are supposed to go is overloaded.

      Bufferbloat is the issue where you make your queues too deep, i.e. you allocate too much RAM to buffering, while the cause of the buffering still exists, so the deeper queue just fills up anyway, so you haven’t improved anything, and have induced extra latency on the packets that do make it trough.

      Deep buffers can help in situations where you have a step down in link speed, but only bursty and not sustained overloading of the slower output link.

      The big bottleneck in router hardware is more about TCAM or HBM memory used to store the FIB of the global routing table. Since the table has grown so much the devices with less high speed memory can’t hold the table anymore, and if they start swapping the FIB to normal memory your routing performance goes to shit.

      So not all of your concerns seem to apply to this class of device, but of course you’re right, The Register should have mentioned the RAM.

      • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thanks. You know a lot about hardware spec reqs in networking equipment. It always drives me crazy when buying a router because they dont seem to list this info.

        Do you have any general advice for spec’ing hardware reqs for small businesses with event spaces with occasionally loads of people? How do u ensure the router can handle everyone’s traffic without dropping packets?

      • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Wait, is this why packet shapers limiting bandwidth on one guest vlan drop so many damn packets? How do you prevent this?

  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    What’s the point of having 1G on WAN and 2.5G on LAN? Traffic won’t hit the LAN port until it’s routed to the Internet, yet the WAN port is the bottleneck.

    Edit: Seems like I switch up the port speed but my point still holds as the bittleneck still exist.

    • Null User Object@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Tranfering between devices on the LAN.

      Edit: Wait, no, it’s the other way around. 2.5 on WAN, and just a single 1GB LAN port. That absolutely doesn’t make sense.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        This is a common setup for WiFi routers, where the idea is that most traffic will be on WiFi.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s the only use I can think of but I don’t know if OpenWRT support VLAN cuz I never used it directly.

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Local NAS, local security cameras, in-house streaming, LAN multiplayer, local torrent-like data sharing (FYI, Windows Update and more uses the local network to share update between computers by default, so it gets downloaded once and then shared internally)

    • tankplanker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Does it have enough power to handle routing (not just switching) 2.5Gb + 2.5Gb + whatever the WiFi can support? My guess is it cannot and it would have pushed the price up signifcantly to do so.

      Does seem counter intuitive to me as this is squarely aimed at enthusiasts who would like to min max their home network.

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Could it help with internal tasks, like self-hosted services or a business that transfers files around a lot?

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    The price is right for sure, but it’s still sad they didn’t shoot for wifi 7. It was a pretty big leap in latency reduction.

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    It would be nice if they would make one with 4 or more LAN ports with at least one of them 2.5G and no WiFi. I need multiple access points to get enough coverage. The built in WiFi is useless to me since it won’t integrate nicely with Unifi.

    • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can hook it to a switch and a Wireless AP… Now your networking is modular.

    • Draghetta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Turn it off then and use your own APs, it’s what I do in my home. I don’t have this specific router but I have a box with 2 eth ports, one goes to pppoe and the other to my home switch, where my APs are connected.