Functional comparison of soft routers and hard routers

Since we are comparing today's soft routing and hardware wide-band routers to the use of broadband access, we need to place the primary comparisons in these areas. So clear that we can have some sober views on the comparison.

We divide the functional comparison into the essential function and the rating function as a comparison. The so-called necessary function refers to the small and medium-sized enterprises in the network access to the customer needs of the function, and the rating function refers to this aspect of the demand may not be temporary demand for the function. A very clear example, such as the Cisco router we often see, is strong enough to be specific! But if I bought a Cisco router for pure broadband access, the Cisco router's dynamic routing peace talks like Igrp,ospf,eigrp, and others like 802.1x , radius, broadband dial-up, support ISDN and so on, support Is-is, support BGP, etc. in doing pure network access to use the basic is useless.

These functions mentioned above are the rated functions we refer to, these functions are not in the requirements of the existing test situation, so in the comparison of the time we must eliminate.

The following are the main functions that must be few:

1, the difficult level of equipment. In this respect the hardware wide-collar router is completely victorious. RouterOS equipment parameters, the complex and is the entire English-language equipment interface is far from a popular user can not be competent. Professional skilled personnel in the equipment soft routing of the time also need to refer to its equipment manuals, even in reference to its manual assistance can not be fully controlled, can only I from time to test and explore. But the hardware wide-collar router In this regard is very humane, a brief clear and full Chinese equipment interface, comfortable interface and the structure of the lively function so that a popular user can easily start operation. Here, the hardware wide-collar router is completely victorious.

2, Nat function, Nat is a wide-collar router most fundamental, the most central function, do not open NAT is not called the wide-collar router, and although the product design of the difference is the NAT function is the same, but the software design of the black and white directly affect the NAT efficiency, router function, Nat function Open in the situation, Router throughput is a specification that weighs a router's functionality.

In addition to the NAT function can be specific weighing a product can be compared to a mature specification, for example, your router can support one-to-one NAT conversion and the number you can support, can support more sensitive NAT port mapping (forwarding), can support Multiplenat, Can support the opening of the time section of the NAT, and so on, in this aspect of the function, hardware wide-collar router and soft route comparison is equal;

But in terms of function analogy, routeros to be more strong, but the function of the strong directly incur the complexity of the equipment, and its NAT function too much deepen the internal structure of the packet, its controllable parameters are too sophisticated, if all open its various NAT, control function, its forwarding function will be seriously affected. In this regard balanced thinking, RouterOS won.

3, the internal control function. This comparison is more unitary, in the strategy (accesslist) side face than, the first is to see whether the network can be useful control, for example, we often see some of the application: in a certain period of time promised a limited user can visit the external network of a limited IP address of a port, Perhaps the promise of an IP address can be through the router online waiting for a more abbreviated use. In this respect the hardware wide-collar router relies on the Web governance interface and the Generi under the invoke line. Strategic moderation, and the function of the soft route is opposite, the flag enemy is equal.

Soft route can be controlled more parameters, but in the hardware wide-collar router generic strategy under the control of more parameters, and hardware-wide-collar router moderation more simple and intuitive. In other areas of internal control, hardware wide-collar routers and soft routes are supported IP/MAC binding function, supporting port mirroring, supporting Portvlan function, here is a mention of the hardware wide-collar routers this router to support the network to avoid the role of ARP, after opening its avoid ARP advance options, Can be useful to avoid the intranet ARP advance, in the soft route did not find this option, comprehensive thinking under the hardware wide-collar router wins.

4. The function of bandwidth restraint. Bandwidth throttling Aspect 2 routes have their own characteristics. The hardware wide collar router features a bandwidth throttling method based on the CBT bandwidth throttling algorithm. This kind of bandwidth control algorithm similar to the bank's false credit criteria, its biggest feature is: bandwidth can be shaken up and down, general antiseptic reward, more use of punishment, in order to ensure the use of useful bandwidth;

The bandwidth throttling of soft routing can be based on group, based on a single PC to limit a fixed bandwidth, so as to ensure that users of bandwidth abuse will not affect other users of the Internet, and on this basis to derive some additional functions, such as to allow users in a period of time (for example, 120s) Its bandwidth can temporarily break a set value, this similar CBT function, can also set the bandwidth control effective time period, as well as set the difference group bandwidth priority waiting, in addition to soft routing built-in some avoid peer-to-peer download options, users only need to select to avoid a peer-to-peer software title, Can avoid many of its downloads, which is convenient and applicable to the majority of management personnel, it can be seen that its bandwidth control is relatively sensitive. RouterOS won in this respect.

5, routing function. Routing function is the primary comparison of the function of static routing, careful comparison of the two static routing options function found that the two optional parameters and the completion of the method is surprisingly consistent. In this respect the two are equivalent.