Best VPN Endpoint - Home to Small Office

Discussion in 'Cisco Small Business Routers and VPN Solutions' started by chelsel, Feb 10, 2007.

  1. chelsel

    chelsel LI Guru Member

    Trying to setup a VPN between my home and a small personal office. I will carry VOIP over the VPN as well (long story), so QOS as well as VPN throughput is important.

    I've never done this before ;-) From my research it appears the WRV200 is an ok bet, but the WRVS4400N is tempting for the draft-N and IPS. Will the 4400N work *with* the WRV200 to reduce costs... I wouldn't mind getting a draft-n router at home and keep the WRV200 at the "office".

    My gut says go with WRV200 because its cheaper and a little more battle-tested... but I'd like to hear opinions.

  2. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    All right Cliff, I'll be honest. The WRV200 has been a dud since its incarnation. Myself, along with a few other alpha testers have been sacrificing our spare time (when it should have been sheep at some moments) trying to help Linksys get this thing to be the "hype" it generated when it first came out. We've almost given up on this friggin' thing. The SIP always seemed to drop, the vpn wouldn't work, ftp would/would not work depending on its mood, etc....

    Well, it seems all that might have come to an end with the new 1.0.29 firmware. The developers finally experienced some of the problems we were running into which helped, along with my providing video footage of the problems we were experiencing. I'll put my neck out and say that the right firmware set has finally arrived.

    I've also got a WRVS4400N. I'm loving this router! However, there's still an issue of how this router performs as the only internet connection because it loses connectivity within 24hrs or lose when running on ADSL (at least it does over here with me) and will only run when set to "obtain ip automatically." If I set it to "static," it won't connect to the internet at all. However, I like to use "two" routers for better security, so I have my wrvs4400n sitting behind my pix 501; in this configuration, I get "all" of the functionality I'm looking for so I'm fine with that. However, for people who may want to use one router at their home/office, this may not be an acceptable solution.

    Personally, we're going to need to put some time into testing this router as we did the WRV200 (6 months). Till then, I'd say go with the WRV200 now that this thing is finally under control...

    I've connected my 4400n to pix 505's, wrv54g's, wag54g's; it will connect and pull a tunnel if your settings are correct.

  3. docinthebox

    docinthebox LI Guru Member

    I had the WRV200 for several months. Had updated the firmware to 1.0.26. All I can say is I was very disappointed by the firmware quality. The router crashed a lot when I did BT. Before the WRV200, I had a WRT54GS running dd-wrt, and although the network might slow down during BT, it never crashed. My WRV200 just kept rebooting. I finally decided to get rid of it and got a WRT350N to run dd-wrt and OpenVPN server. I'm very happy with its performance. The WRT350N uses the BCM4705 CPU and it's definitely very fast. VPN performance is very good. I recommend you include it into your consideration as well.
  4. kspare

    kspare Computer Guy Staff Member Member

    As Jay said, the 4400 is definitly not a recommended solution yet, i've yet to get it to stay up without crashing using my standard config that is solid on the wrv54g and the wrv200.

    The wrv200 is now safe to be called a solid router in my eyes. I've got a couple that have been up for almost 5 days now without problem.

    There are a few bugs that are not confirmed to be fixed (ftp) but we're hoping that has been worked out as well because we can't repliciate the error anymore.

    Long and short of it is try the wrv200, the wireless range is VERY good, so you won't be dissapointed but, no you won't get the range of the draft, but having the router UP as opposed to crashed will definity make a difference :)
  5. docinthebox

    docinthebox LI Guru Member

    For those who have the WRV200 running well, I'd recommend stress testing it with heavy traffic like BT. I can attest that every version up to 1.026 has not been stable. Considering the product has been out for a year now, it's not only disappointing, but quite amazing that the Linksys engineers cannot even come up with a rock solid stable firmware. Is that too much to ask? I'm not asking for new features, just for the firmware to not crash.
  6. kspare

    kspare Computer Guy Staff Member Member

    You need to try the new firmware that was just released. Many improvements. It will change your outlook on this device now...
  7. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Then you might try firmware 1.0.29. Stress testing 1.0.26 will garner no new news other than validating the obvious; it has flaws.

    Again, 1.0.29 is available for download; do your worst, peops, and let us know what you find...

  8. chelsel

    chelsel LI Guru Member

    how well does VOIP perform over the tunnel on a WRV200? I've been looking at the SnapGear SG300 as an alternative, although it's a lot pricier.

  9. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    VOIP appears to be pretty solid now. I woke up this morning to my surprise and foulnd the wrv200 was still connected to the internet whereas before it had died in its sleep :)

    It's looking good for this router all of a sudden...

  10. chelsel

    chelsel LI Guru Member

    Is it still up? I don't know if I'd even want something that locked up or froze once a month... my current router uptime is 97 days 1 hours 48 minutes...
  11. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Network Guru Member

    Nobody peeking at the RV0 series?
  12. eric_stewart

    eric_stewart Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    The poster's original requirements included VoIP. Unfortunately the RV042's firmware literally does not support a SIP (session initiation protocol for you lurkers) Application Layer Gateway. It was not designed in so it's not a bug per se. I am told that this is to be released very soon, making the RV042, IMHO, the very best solution at its price point.

    Mine has been extremely solid, and other than the fact that it breaks VoIP it has given me absolutely no issues. Add to that its h/w-accelerated VPN functionality, support for 50 site-to-site and 5 QuickVPN connections simultaneously, dual WAN (or WAN + DMZ) support and it's a winner.

    webmaster of <-- please take a look!
  13. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Network Guru Member

    I haven't setup an 042 with VoIP, but I have some setups where an 082 has VoIP in place..and working fine for them.

  14. ccbadd

    ccbadd Network Guru Member

    You know, I really think people should look at there VoIP adapters for the Nat traversal solution. I have been using my Packet8 adapter behind a WRV200 form months with no problems. I did enable ICE for Nat-t in the BPA-410 setup and have never had a disconnect. This includes all firmwares I have tried on the WRV200 back to 1.0.12?? I think. If your VoIP adapter's firmware supported ICE you would not have had problems even with the RV042.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice