 |
 |
Good Router for 100 Mbps Internet?
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
What it says on the tin. Wireless is unnecessary.
I almost get the impression that beyond getting some form of Cisco beast router, the best option is to throw a bunch of NICs in a PC box.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
What's wrong with the Airport Extreme?
Even for just a gigabit router/NAS hub/USB print server, it's not that bad a deal.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Reason one: hadn't thought of it.
Reason two: there is no reason two.
I have one, so I guess I can test it myself, but it would be loads less of a pain in the ass to know beforehand that it can actually handle that level of throughput. I mean, my current router can handle it on the LAN side, but it tops out at about 30 Mbps from the WAN side.
So, to be sure, are you saying it can?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
A little bit of Googling seems to indicate it does. Thanks for the splendid idea.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Any modern wifi router that's not in the bargain bin should be fine. Certainly anything $100+.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by subego 
A little bit of Googling seems to indicate it does. Thanks for the splendid idea.
Wireless may be unnecessary, but the dual-band wi-fi could come in handy at some point.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot
Wireless may be unnecessary, but the dual-band wi-fi could come in handy at some point.
There's already an Extreme about 25' away from where my cable comes in. I never went wireless right at that spot because it's in the far corner of my apartment, and I'd be sending 3/4 of my signal into the building's bike storage room.
OTOH, I've never been against saturating the spectrum on my channel to keep the riff-raff away. I've got three other access points going too. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Aaaaand... not that we need proof I'm an idiot, it turns out the cable modem which comes with the service is also a router.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Land of Enchantment
Status:
Offline
|
|
So all you need is a Gig ethernet cable? Cool 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
That part's definitely cool, but... let's just say I didn't take the most direct route to that conclusion.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm also not sure I'm thrilled using Comcast firmware. I'd be shocked if there wasn't at least one backdoor, possibly several.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top