3 ms·

> you should be separating the functions of router and wifi into their own discrete devices Why? If you need a media converter, router, and wireless access po

by sltkr 7y ago

> you should be separating the functions of router and wifi into their own discrete devices Why? If you need a media converter, router, and wireless access point anyway, there are obvious space and power advantages to combining these functions into a single device. I could see a concern about performance, but from scanning online reviews, it seems like the Turris Omnia performs just fine. > A router should ... > A wifi ap should ... Instead of just stating your beliefs as if their truth is self-evident, please offer some rationale.

walrus01 7y ago
Network engineer with 20 years experience: Routers that have wireless interfaces on them are toys. Carrier grade routers have wired interfaces only. Introducing binary blobs of atheros/Qualcomm chipset support into a router is a recipe for instability. In my field, "toy" is anything that costs under 500 bucks. If we want a wireless interface for OOB, we'll add an opengear LTE gateway device. The router I mentioned in the earlier post consumes 5W of power and is the size of a pack of cigarettes. It looks like a toy, and is under $50, basically disposable, but is much more stable and bug free than home routers you can buy from $85-275 at Best buy which integrate wifi capability. The consumer market for cool looking multi band $200 routers with spiky antennas coming out of the top is, in my opinion, ridiculous. As for the dedicated wifi side, ask any professional who uses (on the cheap side, ubnt) or xirrus, ruckus APs in environments with thousands of clients whether wifi aps should also be routers. They'll have a good laugh at the idea.
- tssva 7y ago
  The router you mention uses a cpu originally designed for the home wifi router market and was in fact heavily used in them. It also requires binary blobs to accelerate NAT to that 800Mbs and to accelerate IPsec. EdgeOS also tends to be a buggy mess. The rollout of the 2.x train for the er-x has been a fiasco.

by sltkr 7y ago

walrus01 7y ago

Network engineer with 20 years experience: Routers that have wireless interfaces on them are toys. Carrier grade routers have wired interfaces only. Introducing binary blobs of atheros/Qualcomm chipset support into a router is a recipe for instability. In my field, "toy" is anything that costs under 500 bucks. If we want a wireless interface for OOB, we'll add an opengear LTE gateway device. The router I mentioned in the earlier post consumes 5W of power and is the size of a pack of cigarettes. It looks like a toy, and is under $50, basically disposable, but is much more stable and bug free than home routers you can buy from $85-275 at Best buy which integrate wifi capability. The consumer market for cool looking multi band $200 routers with spiky antennas coming out of the top is, in my opinion, ridiculous. As for the dedicated wifi side, ask any professional who uses (on the cheap side, ubnt) or xirrus, ruckus APs in environments with thousands of clients whether wifi aps should also be routers. They'll have a good laugh at the idea.

tssva 7y ago
The router you mention uses a cpu originally designed for the home wifi router market and was in fact heavily used in them. It also requires binary blobs to accelerate NAT to that 800Mbs and to accelerate IPsec. EdgeOS also tends to be a buggy mess. The rollout of the 2.x train for the er-x has been a fiasco.