<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_27_1945237</id>
	<title>Home Router For High-Speed Connection?</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259311560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>soulprivate writes <i>"My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps (60, 80 and 100 Mbps). However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NAT; it reaches 60-70 Mbps only if NAT is disabled. Is there any recommendation for a brand/model of residential router that is able to get more than 70 Mbps with NAT enabled? I have been looking for benchmarks or comparisons, to no avail. Does anyone know one? What are your experiences at home?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>soulprivate writes " My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps ( 60 , 80 and 100 Mbps ) .
However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NAT ; it reaches 60-70 Mbps only if NAT is disabled .
Is there any recommendation for a brand/model of residential router that is able to get more than 70 Mbps with NAT enabled ?
I have been looking for benchmarks or comparisons , to no avail .
Does anyone know one ?
What are your experiences at home ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>soulprivate writes "My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps (60, 80 and 100 Mbps).
However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NAT; it reaches 60-70 Mbps only if NAT is disabled.
Is there any recommendation for a brand/model of residential router that is able to get more than 70 Mbps with NAT enabled?
I have been looking for benchmarks or comparisons, to no avail.
Does anyone know one?
What are your experiences at home?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250510</id>
	<title>Simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259324700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Junk x86 machine with two NICs + linux = very fast router</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Junk x86 machine with two NICs + linux = very fast router</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Junk x86 machine with two NICs + linux = very fast router</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249458</id>
	<title>+1 for pfSense</title>
	<author>mvip</author>
	<datestamp>1259319120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've given up hope on those cheap routers. Sure, DD-WRT and Tomato are decent products, but they don't come close to a box with <a href="http://www.pfsense.com/" title="pfsense.com" rel="nofollow">pfSense</a> [pfsense.com]. Just pick up the smallest, cheapest and least power consuming ITX box you can find and install pfSense on it. You can control it all from the web browser. Best of all, it's based on FreeBSD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've given up hope on those cheap routers .
Sure , DD-WRT and Tomato are decent products , but they do n't come close to a box with pfSense [ pfsense.com ] .
Just pick up the smallest , cheapest and least power consuming ITX box you can find and install pfSense on it .
You can control it all from the web browser .
Best of all , it 's based on FreeBSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've given up hope on those cheap routers.
Sure, DD-WRT and Tomato are decent products, but they don't come close to a box with pfSense [pfsense.com].
Just pick up the smallest, cheapest and least power consuming ITX box you can find and install pfSense on it.
You can control it all from the web browser.
Best of all, it's based on FreeBSD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251924</id>
	<title>Doing it Your vay can be easier than you think</title>
	<author>nikolag</author>
	<datestamp>1259335860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We also had similar expirience with home routers, but then tried monowall, pfsense, ip cop, and mikrotik. All of them work nice, have more or less user frendly web interface (or something similar), and also differ in price (monowall, pfsense, and ip cop are free). In all cases we were serving a mixed wireless-wired network of 50+ users, using NAT, DNS, firewall, port forwarding and some other features, depending on "router/firewall/whatewer" software mentioned.</p><p>At hardware side, we tried several hardware configurations, from 125MHz ARM-based routers, to 333MHz celeron or over 2GHz AMD processor-based PC's, and maybe most interesting was an Alix board with 500MHz AMD Geode x86 processor. Runs at low power, it's small, and gives all advantages (and other things<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) ) of a PC. Trying several homer routers (Linksys, Buffalo, Planet, TP-link, etc) proved what other posts already pointed out - they are good-enough for aDSL lines, and speeds up to 10Mbps. Nevertheless, several Thompson and Siemens routers performed badly (instability is their middle name), but they are out of your league anyway and some of them are not available any more. Worst firewall in our experience came from Microsoft (ISA), and while being stable, it introduced huge packet delay and a number of "features" that made us bitter many times.</p><p>We also tried several Cisco routers and firewall, and to say the truth, were not impressed by what you get for the price, as beforementioned solutions provided same or better level of service for much less money. I don't say that they suck, but just that they are some kind of reference, so we tried them.</p><p>For last 2 years we settled with 1.6GHz AMD Turion based PC with 4 network cards, and one wireless card, 512MB RAM, system is on 256MB CF card, running one of mentioned software packages, while logging is done on separate machine. Going with CF (notice that nothing gets written to it) instead of HDD, provided us with increased stability, as hdds do fail more often. Good UPS is also a plus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We also had similar expirience with home routers , but then tried monowall , pfsense , ip cop , and mikrotik .
All of them work nice , have more or less user frendly web interface ( or something similar ) , and also differ in price ( monowall , pfsense , and ip cop are free ) .
In all cases we were serving a mixed wireless-wired network of 50 + users , using NAT , DNS , firewall , port forwarding and some other features , depending on " router/firewall/whatewer " software mentioned.At hardware side , we tried several hardware configurations , from 125MHz ARM-based routers , to 333MHz celeron or over 2GHz AMD processor-based PC 's , and maybe most interesting was an Alix board with 500MHz AMD Geode x86 processor .
Runs at low power , it 's small , and gives all advantages ( and other things : ) ) of a PC .
Trying several homer routers ( Linksys , Buffalo , Planet , TP-link , etc ) proved what other posts already pointed out - they are good-enough for aDSL lines , and speeds up to 10Mbps .
Nevertheless , several Thompson and Siemens routers performed badly ( instability is their middle name ) , but they are out of your league anyway and some of them are not available any more .
Worst firewall in our experience came from Microsoft ( ISA ) , and while being stable , it introduced huge packet delay and a number of " features " that made us bitter many times.We also tried several Cisco routers and firewall , and to say the truth , were not impressed by what you get for the price , as beforementioned solutions provided same or better level of service for much less money .
I do n't say that they suck , but just that they are some kind of reference , so we tried them.For last 2 years we settled with 1.6GHz AMD Turion based PC with 4 network cards , and one wireless card , 512MB RAM , system is on 256MB CF card , running one of mentioned software packages , while logging is done on separate machine .
Going with CF ( notice that nothing gets written to it ) instead of HDD , provided us with increased stability , as hdds do fail more often .
Good UPS is also a plus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We also had similar expirience with home routers, but then tried monowall, pfsense, ip cop, and mikrotik.
All of them work nice, have more or less user frendly web interface (or something similar), and also differ in price (monowall, pfsense, and ip cop are free).
In all cases we were serving a mixed wireless-wired network of 50+ users, using NAT, DNS, firewall, port forwarding and some other features, depending on "router/firewall/whatewer" software mentioned.At hardware side, we tried several hardware configurations, from 125MHz ARM-based routers, to 333MHz celeron or over 2GHz AMD processor-based PC's, and maybe most interesting was an Alix board with 500MHz AMD Geode x86 processor.
Runs at low power, it's small, and gives all advantages (and other things :) ) of a PC.
Trying several homer routers (Linksys, Buffalo, Planet, TP-link, etc) proved what other posts already pointed out - they are good-enough for aDSL lines, and speeds up to 10Mbps.
Nevertheless, several Thompson and Siemens routers performed badly (instability is their middle name), but they are out of your league anyway and some of them are not available any more.
Worst firewall in our experience came from Microsoft (ISA), and while being stable, it introduced huge packet delay and a number of "features" that made us bitter many times.We also tried several Cisco routers and firewall, and to say the truth, were not impressed by what you get for the price, as beforementioned solutions provided same or better level of service for much less money.
I don't say that they suck, but just that they are some kind of reference, so we tried them.For last 2 years we settled with 1.6GHz AMD Turion based PC with 4 network cards, and one wireless card, 512MB RAM, system is on 256MB CF card, running one of mentioned software packages, while logging is done on separate machine.
Going with CF (notice that nothing gets written to it) instead of HDD, provided us with increased stability, as hdds do fail more often.
Good UPS is also a plus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252710</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>andreyvul</author>
	<datestamp>1259347080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy(ish) torrent loads</p></div><p>just set it to reboot @3:00 via cron

problem solved</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy ( ish ) torrent loadsjust set it to reboot @ 3 : 00 via cron problem solved</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy(ish) torrent loadsjust set it to reboot @3:00 via cron

problem solved
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</id>
	<title>The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259315340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just get a cheap router like a WRT54GL and run OpenWRT on it. I have a couple of them in a WDS network. They're very manageable, and you can set up DMZs and such, and you can do basically anything you would do on a normal Linux system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just get a cheap router like a WRT54GL and run OpenWRT on it .
I have a couple of them in a WDS network .
They 're very manageable , and you can set up DMZs and such , and you can do basically anything you would do on a normal Linux system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just get a cheap router like a WRT54GL and run OpenWRT on it.
I have a couple of them in a WDS network.
They're very manageable, and you can set up DMZs and such, and you can do basically anything you would do on a normal Linux system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252644</id>
	<title>x86box + FreeBSD + (2 * NICS)</title>
	<author>bsdguy</author>
	<datestamp>1259346060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FreeBSD 8.0 and a couple of Intel Pro100B nics or Gigabyte NICS installed on any x86 system<br>built in the last 10 years should do just fine as a router.</p><p><a href="http://www.freebsd.org/" title="freebsd.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.freebsd.org/</a> [freebsd.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FreeBSD 8.0 and a couple of Intel Pro100B nics or Gigabyte NICS installed on any x86 systembuilt in the last 10 years should do just fine as a router.http : //www.freebsd.org/ [ freebsd.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FreeBSD 8.0 and a couple of Intel Pro100B nics or Gigabyte NICS installed on any x86 systembuilt in the last 10 years should do just fine as a router.http://www.freebsd.org/ [freebsd.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952</id>
	<title>I Beg To Differ</title>
	<author>didde</author>
	<datestamp>1259316540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm on an unmetered 100 Mbps line, bursting up to 300 Mbps from time to time. Just like you, I had a tough time finding consumer-grade hardware able to keep up with speeds &gt; 30-50 Mbps. After going through most of what's on offer here in the EU, short of DIY routers, I ended up with D-Link's "Wireless N Gigabit router DIR-655". Believe it or not, but I have actually seen throughput close to 150 Mbps (using NAT) on the WAN while on this network.
<br> <br>
Of course, YMMW, but my search ended with this piece of hardware.Of course, it's priced slightly higher than the average router, but IMHO it's worth it.
<br> <br>
On a side note: I personally, had no luck what so ever using Linksys offerings, including the WRT54*. Most "premium" hardware platforms in the consumer sphere only offer throughput close to 30-40 or even 50 Mbps while on NAT.
<br> <br>
Good luck. And enjoy the speeds you have been blessed with, son.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm on an unmetered 100 Mbps line , bursting up to 300 Mbps from time to time .
Just like you , I had a tough time finding consumer-grade hardware able to keep up with speeds &gt; 30-50 Mbps .
After going through most of what 's on offer here in the EU , short of DIY routers , I ended up with D-Link 's " Wireless N Gigabit router DIR-655 " .
Believe it or not , but I have actually seen throughput close to 150 Mbps ( using NAT ) on the WAN while on this network .
Of course , YMMW , but my search ended with this piece of hardware.Of course , it 's priced slightly higher than the average router , but IMHO it 's worth it .
On a side note : I personally , had no luck what so ever using Linksys offerings , including the WRT54 * .
Most " premium " hardware platforms in the consumer sphere only offer throughput close to 30-40 or even 50 Mbps while on NAT .
Good luck .
And enjoy the speeds you have been blessed with , son .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm on an unmetered 100 Mbps line, bursting up to 300 Mbps from time to time.
Just like you, I had a tough time finding consumer-grade hardware able to keep up with speeds &gt; 30-50 Mbps.
After going through most of what's on offer here in the EU, short of DIY routers, I ended up with D-Link's "Wireless N Gigabit router DIR-655".
Believe it or not, but I have actually seen throughput close to 150 Mbps (using NAT) on the WAN while on this network.
Of course, YMMW, but my search ended with this piece of hardware.Of course, it's priced slightly higher than the average router, but IMHO it's worth it.
On a side note: I personally, had no luck what so ever using Linksys offerings, including the WRT54*.
Most "premium" hardware platforms in the consumer sphere only offer throughput close to 30-40 or even 50 Mbps while on NAT.
Good luck.
And enjoy the speeds you have been blessed with, son.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249772</id>
	<title>Home Router For High-Speed Connection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259320800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Home Router For High-Speed Connection?<br>HomeR outer For High-Speed Connection?<br>Homer out er For High-Speed Connection?<br>Homer out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. err<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. for high-speed connection?<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>I got nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Home Router For High-Speed Connection ? HomeR outer For High-Speed Connection ? Homer out er For High-Speed Connection ? Homer out .. err .. for high-speed connection ?
...I got nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Home Router For High-Speed Connection?HomeR outer For High-Speed Connection?Homer out er For High-Speed Connection?Homer out .. err .. for high-speed connection?
...I got nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249648</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>palesius</author>
	<datestamp>1259320020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't used pfSense, but have used m0n0 for quire a while. If you're concerned about your old hardware crapping out (or don't have any lying around), you should be able to put your own box together for under $200 easily that will have far more horsepower than anything you can buy for even close to that price. You can easily use a CF card for booting and pick a fanless board. You can avoid all moving parts and hopefully up the reliability quite a bit.<br>If rolling your own box is beyond your skills or time, in additioning to putting my own box together I've also gotten two units from these guys:<br><a href="http://www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall\_systems" title="logicsupply.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall\_systems</a> [logicsupply.com]<br>in rackmountable units, but they also make smaller ones (10"x2"x7"). They also have boxes running untangle (which I haven't used myself either).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't used pfSense , but have used m0n0 for quire a while .
If you 're concerned about your old hardware crapping out ( or do n't have any lying around ) , you should be able to put your own box together for under $ 200 easily that will have far more horsepower than anything you can buy for even close to that price .
You can easily use a CF card for booting and pick a fanless board .
You can avoid all moving parts and hopefully up the reliability quite a bit.If rolling your own box is beyond your skills or time , in additioning to putting my own box together I 've also gotten two units from these guys : http : //www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall \ _systems [ logicsupply.com ] in rackmountable units , but they also make smaller ones ( 10 " x2 " x7 " ) .
They also have boxes running untangle ( which I have n't used myself either ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't used pfSense, but have used m0n0 for quire a while.
If you're concerned about your old hardware crapping out (or don't have any lying around), you should be able to put your own box together for under $200 easily that will have far more horsepower than anything you can buy for even close to that price.
You can easily use a CF card for booting and pick a fanless board.
You can avoid all moving parts and hopefully up the reliability quite a bit.If rolling your own box is beyond your skills or time, in additioning to putting my own box together I've also gotten two units from these guys:http://www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall\_systems [logicsupply.com]in rackmountable units, but they also make smaller ones (10"x2"x7").
They also have boxes running untangle (which I haven't used myself either).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248870</id>
	<title>Chart comparing throughput of various home routers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/<br>I found this a few months ago... seems what you are asking for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com \ _chart/Itemid,189/I found this a few months ago... seems what you are asking for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/I found this a few months ago... seems what you are asking for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249484</id>
	<title>Vyatta</title>
	<author>SplunkDotNet</author>
	<datestamp>1259319300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.vyatta.org/" title="vyatta.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.vyatta.org/</a> [vyatta.org] I've been using this for some time now and it's very capable. Just get yourself some old hardware (my first box was an old laptop).</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.vyatta.org/ [ vyatta.org ] I 've been using this for some time now and it 's very capable .
Just get yourself some old hardware ( my first box was an old laptop ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.vyatta.org/ [vyatta.org] I've been using this for some time now and it's very capable.
Just get yourself some old hardware (my first box was an old laptop).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252044</id>
	<title>vyatta + x86 hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259337480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say it depends on the details of that d-link router you have -- is it a cable modem itself or something your just hookiing up to your cable modem.</p><p>If the later, Vyatta will work wonders with some old x86 hardware....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say it depends on the details of that d-link router you have -- is it a cable modem itself or something your just hookiing up to your cable modem.If the later , Vyatta will work wonders with some old x86 hardware... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say it depends on the details of that d-link router you have -- is it a cable modem itself or something your just hookiing up to your cable modem.If the later, Vyatta will work wonders with some old x86 hardware....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252464</id>
	<title>Apple routers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259343060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time Capsule and the (square) AirPort Extreme Base station are capable of achieving exceptional throughputs, well beyond 100 Mbps+.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time Capsule and the ( square ) AirPort Extreme Base station are capable of achieving exceptional throughputs , well beyond 100 Mbps + .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time Capsule and the (square) AirPort Extreme Base station are capable of achieving exceptional throughputs, well beyond 100 Mbps+.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253522</id>
	<title>Re:this is on the front page? really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259407440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do people bitch about technical discussions on slashdot when the homepage is usually full of political crap and three day old viral stuff? Why come here in the first place.</p><p>And you can bet this story will have a much higher google pagerank than the typical 10-20 replies thread on arstechnica. Yeah, I fuckin love searching google for stuff where nobody seems to know the answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do people bitch about technical discussions on slashdot when the homepage is usually full of political crap and three day old viral stuff ?
Why come here in the first place.And you can bet this story will have a much higher google pagerank than the typical 10-20 replies thread on arstechnica .
Yeah , I fuckin love searching google for stuff where nobody seems to know the answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do people bitch about technical discussions on slashdot when the homepage is usually full of political crap and three day old viral stuff?
Why come here in the first place.And you can bet this story will have a much higher google pagerank than the typical 10-20 replies thread on arstechnica.
Yeah, I fuckin love searching google for stuff where nobody seems to know the answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30273088</id>
	<title>button</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259612880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a software out there that runs linux on a PC. The Software is called smoothwall. http://www.smoothwall.org/ I have played around with it a few years ago. The breakdown of it... take a PC a Pent 3 or so with two NIC cards. One will hook up to your cable modem. The other one will hook up to a switch (not a hub needs to be a switch) like a Dlink or something that has 4/5 ports. A normal Router is a router and a switch built all in one. I hope this helps you out some.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a software out there that runs linux on a PC .
The Software is called smoothwall .
http : //www.smoothwall.org/ I have played around with it a few years ago .
The breakdown of it... take a PC a Pent 3 or so with two NIC cards .
One will hook up to your cable modem .
The other one will hook up to a switch ( not a hub needs to be a switch ) like a Dlink or something that has 4/5 ports .
A normal Router is a router and a switch built all in one .
I hope this helps you out some .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a software out there that runs linux on a PC.
The Software is called smoothwall.
http://www.smoothwall.org/ I have played around with it a few years ago.
The breakdown of it... take a PC a Pent 3 or so with two NIC cards.
One will hook up to your cable modem.
The other one will hook up to a switch (not a hub needs to be a switch) like a Dlink or something that has 4/5 ports.
A normal Router is a router and a switch built all in one.
I hope this helps you out some.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30265038</id>
	<title>Apple Extreme</title>
	<author>kc0re</author>
	<datestamp>1259501280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Apple Extreme Router can maintain very high speeds, with or without NAT.

It's a Gigabit Router.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Apple Extreme Router can maintain very high speeds , with or without NAT .
It 's a Gigabit Router .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Apple Extreme Router can maintain very high speeds, with or without NAT.
It's a Gigabit Router.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253292</id>
	<title>No WRT54G</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1259401920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 50Mbit up/down connection to my home and found my old go-to, the wrt54g/gl/gs to be lacking.  I have a pile of those routers and they just couldn't perform - I decided I would need some headroom.  I went out and got a wrt300n (the one with the awesome satellite dish sticking out of the top) and it has performed admirably with the help of dd-wrt.</p><p>A 50Mbps connection is the greatest thing ever bestowed upon man.  May we all have them soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 50Mbit up/down connection to my home and found my old go-to , the wrt54g/gl/gs to be lacking .
I have a pile of those routers and they just could n't perform - I decided I would need some headroom .
I went out and got a wrt300n ( the one with the awesome satellite dish sticking out of the top ) and it has performed admirably with the help of dd-wrt.A 50Mbps connection is the greatest thing ever bestowed upon man .
May we all have them soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 50Mbit up/down connection to my home and found my old go-to, the wrt54g/gl/gs to be lacking.
I have a pile of those routers and they just couldn't perform - I decided I would need some headroom.
I went out and got a wrt300n (the one with the awesome satellite dish sticking out of the top) and it has performed admirably with the help of dd-wrt.A 50Mbps connection is the greatest thing ever bestowed upon man.
May we all have them soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249076</id>
	<title>pfsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259317080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PFSense with an Alix mother board is a bit difficult to setup, but can handle a lot more traffic than many of the other commercial routers. I wrote up the process to install here : <a href="http://techimpact.crgmedia.com/techimpact/entry/does\_it\_make\_pfsense" title="crgmedia.com" rel="nofollow">http://techimpact.crgmedia.com/techimpact/entry/does\_it\_make\_pfsense</a> [crgmedia.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>PFSense with an Alix mother board is a bit difficult to setup , but can handle a lot more traffic than many of the other commercial routers .
I wrote up the process to install here : http : //techimpact.crgmedia.com/techimpact/entry/does \ _it \ _make \ _pfsense [ crgmedia.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PFSense with an Alix mother board is a bit difficult to setup, but can handle a lot more traffic than many of the other commercial routers.
I wrote up the process to install here : http://techimpact.crgmedia.com/techimpact/entry/does\_it\_make\_pfsense [crgmedia.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253168</id>
	<title>almost all routers sold in Korea</title>
	<author>ahavatar</author>
	<datestamp>1259398920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's been more than 4 years since 100Mbps connections became popular in Korea. Nowadays, almost all routers sold in Korea are 100Mbps ready. Best selling local brands like Iptime or Anygate and impoted models like Netgear WGR614SS are all advertised to support a 100Mbps connection. It's been discontinued, but even a new version (can't remember the version number) of Linksys WRT54G with 100Mbps support was introduced in Korea couple of years ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been more than 4 years since 100Mbps connections became popular in Korea .
Nowadays , almost all routers sold in Korea are 100Mbps ready .
Best selling local brands like Iptime or Anygate and impoted models like Netgear WGR614SS are all advertised to support a 100Mbps connection .
It 's been discontinued , but even a new version ( ca n't remember the version number ) of Linksys WRT54G with 100Mbps support was introduced in Korea couple of years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been more than 4 years since 100Mbps connections became popular in Korea.
Nowadays, almost all routers sold in Korea are 100Mbps ready.
Best selling local brands like Iptime or Anygate and impoted models like Netgear WGR614SS are all advertised to support a 100Mbps connection.
It's been discontinued, but even a new version (can't remember the version number) of Linksys WRT54G with 100Mbps support was introduced in Korea couple of years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252590</id>
	<title>OpenBSD</title>
	<author>Spit</author>
	<datestamp>1259345340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OpenBSD seems to have bottomless routing performance in my installations. Any variant thereof should do the trick. OpenBSD is fairly user friendly to setup in these configrations compared to other systems like FreeBSD and Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OpenBSD seems to have bottomless routing performance in my installations .
Any variant thereof should do the trick .
OpenBSD is fairly user friendly to setup in these configrations compared to other systems like FreeBSD and Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OpenBSD seems to have bottomless routing performance in my installations.
Any variant thereof should do the trick.
OpenBSD is fairly user friendly to setup in these configrations compared to other systems like FreeBSD and Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251816</id>
	<title>Re:WRT-160NL</title>
	<author>binaryspiral</author>
	<datestamp>1259334720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>90 mbps = 11.25 MBps</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>90 mbps = 11.25 MBps</tokentext>
<sentencetext>90 mbps = 11.25 MBps</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248842</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, I have one of those, running HyperWRT... I can't manage to go over 2MB/s between the internal LAN and the WAN, though.  On the same LAN, my hosts usually push 6-10MB/s between each other.</p><p>My ISP gives me a couple of static IPs, though... so I put my main box (and any other hosts I want good performance on) on a GigE switch connected directly to the 15Mbps uplink... the NAT router is just for all of the rest of the lazy wifi laptops and older wired boxes who just deal with the slower performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , I have one of those , running HyperWRT... I ca n't manage to go over 2MB/s between the internal LAN and the WAN , though .
On the same LAN , my hosts usually push 6-10MB/s between each other.My ISP gives me a couple of static IPs , though... so I put my main box ( and any other hosts I want good performance on ) on a GigE switch connected directly to the 15Mbps uplink... the NAT router is just for all of the rest of the lazy wifi laptops and older wired boxes who just deal with the slower performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, I have one of those, running HyperWRT... I can't manage to go over 2MB/s between the internal LAN and the WAN, though.
On the same LAN, my hosts usually push 6-10MB/s between each other.My ISP gives me a couple of static IPs, though... so I put my main box (and any other hosts I want good performance on) on a GigE switch connected directly to the 15Mbps uplink... the NAT router is just for all of the rest of the lazy wifi laptops and older wired boxes who just deal with the slower performance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249172</id>
	<title>Bitterness</title>
	<author>Chonnawonga</author>
	<datestamp>1259317740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry. I can't offer any advice because I'm too busy being jealous that you're ISP actually gives you good connection speeds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry .
I ca n't offer any advice because I 'm too busy being jealous that you 're ISP actually gives you good connection speeds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry.
I can't offer any advice because I'm too busy being jealous that you're ISP actually gives you good connection speeds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249206</id>
	<title>Build your own?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1259317920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.pfsense.org</p><p>Problem solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.pfsense.orgProblem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.pfsense.orgProblem solved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251632</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259332560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll second this as well. I got my 100/100 connection in 1998. I couldnt find any SOHO router which advertised a 100mbit port speed to actually pass data even close to that range. Ended up just turning my server into my internet gateway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll second this as well .
I got my 100/100 connection in 1998 .
I couldnt find any SOHO router which advertised a 100mbit port speed to actually pass data even close to that range .
Ended up just turning my server into my internet gateway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll second this as well.
I got my 100/100 connection in 1998.
I couldnt find any SOHO router which advertised a 100mbit port speed to actually pass data even close to that range.
Ended up just turning my server into my internet gateway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252782</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259348400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>These little WRT's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU's.</i></p><p>They have what <i>is</i> a <b>32-bit 200 MHz processor.  Specifically <a href="http://www.broadcom.com/products/Wireless-LAN/802.11-Wireless-LAN-Solutions/BCM5352EL" title="broadcom.com">this one</a> [broadcom.com] in the referenced Linksys model.</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These little WRT 's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU 's.They have what is a 32-bit 200 MHz processor .
Specifically this one [ broadcom.com ] in the referenced Linksys model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These little WRT's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU's.They have what is a 32-bit 200 MHz processor.
Specifically this one [broadcom.com] in the referenced Linksys model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248806</id>
	<title>Get one with gig-e ports as they have more power</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1259315880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get one with gig-e ports as they have more power</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get one with gig-e ports as they have more power</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get one with gig-e ports as they have more power</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252884</id>
	<title>Re:WRT-160NL</title>
	<author>BLKMGK</author>
	<datestamp>1259350260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That one actually rates decently here -&gt; <a href="http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/index.php?option=com\_chart&amp;Itemid=167" title="smallnetbuilder.com">http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/index.php?option=com\_chart&amp;Itemid=167</a> [smallnetbuilder.com] but it looks like there's a bunch of others beating it pretty badly too. An OpenWRT port or something like it would be a major attraction though!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That one actually rates decently here - &gt; http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/index.php ? option = com \ _chart&amp;Itemid = 167 [ smallnetbuilder.com ] but it looks like there 's a bunch of others beating it pretty badly too .
An OpenWRT port or something like it would be a major attraction though !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That one actually rates decently here -&gt; http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/index.php?option=com\_chart&amp;Itemid=167 [smallnetbuilder.com] but it looks like there's a bunch of others beating it pretty badly too.
An OpenWRT port or something like it would be a major attraction though!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252552</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259344740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a number of other choices as well.<br><a href="http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/" title="smallnetbuilder.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/</a> [smallnetbuilder.com] Speed comparison here. -M</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a number of other choices as well.http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com \ _chart/Itemid,189/ [ smallnetbuilder.com ] Speed comparison here .
-M</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a number of other choices as well.http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/ [smallnetbuilder.com] Speed comparison here.
-M</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249408</id>
	<title>Jon R</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have had a very good experience with my D-link DGL-4100.  Lan connections max out at whatever the respective hard drives can read/write at, Usually between 55 - 80 MB/s.  It has a lot of advanced features, almost everything you'd expect from a custom firmware like DD-WRT.  Too many for me to list, look up the demo interface on their website to see what it's got.  My internet package is rated at only 30mbp down / 5mbp up, But when running bit-torrents at that speed, I burnt out several routers before landing on this one, which was able to withstand the punishment of that many connections.  I'm sure almost any router out there can muster that speed in a single connection, but multiple connections are really what bog it down.  I have also been able to achieve burst download rates of about 35 - 40mbp (during off-peak hours).  My router is definatley no longer the bottleneck of the system.  It does appear pricey for a router, but I can attest that it is worth it for someone who likes to keep a lot of constant traffic in and out of their network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have had a very good experience with my D-link DGL-4100 .
Lan connections max out at whatever the respective hard drives can read/write at , Usually between 55 - 80 MB/s .
It has a lot of advanced features , almost everything you 'd expect from a custom firmware like DD-WRT .
Too many for me to list , look up the demo interface on their website to see what it 's got .
My internet package is rated at only 30mbp down / 5mbp up , But when running bit-torrents at that speed , I burnt out several routers before landing on this one , which was able to withstand the punishment of that many connections .
I 'm sure almost any router out there can muster that speed in a single connection , but multiple connections are really what bog it down .
I have also been able to achieve burst download rates of about 35 - 40mbp ( during off-peak hours ) .
My router is definatley no longer the bottleneck of the system .
It does appear pricey for a router , but I can attest that it is worth it for someone who likes to keep a lot of constant traffic in and out of their network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have had a very good experience with my D-link DGL-4100.
Lan connections max out at whatever the respective hard drives can read/write at, Usually between 55 - 80 MB/s.
It has a lot of advanced features, almost everything you'd expect from a custom firmware like DD-WRT.
Too many for me to list, look up the demo interface on their website to see what it's got.
My internet package is rated at only 30mbp down / 5mbp up, But when running bit-torrents at that speed, I burnt out several routers before landing on this one, which was able to withstand the punishment of that many connections.
I'm sure almost any router out there can muster that speed in a single connection, but multiple connections are really what bog it down.
I have also been able to achieve burst download rates of about 35 - 40mbp (during off-peak hours).
My router is definatley no longer the bottleneck of the system.
It does appear pricey for a router, but I can attest that it is worth it for someone who likes to keep a lot of constant traffic in and out of their network.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250032</id>
	<title>MSI RG54G3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MSI RG54G3 does 100Mb/s with NAT, URL filtering, port mapping, etc, etc (LAN part). I can get as much as much as 11MB/s with torrents - no crash, no freeze. WiFi works extremely well too.</p><p>Mine is 4 years old - and I have NEVER had any problems with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MSI RG54G3 does 100Mb/s with NAT , URL filtering , port mapping , etc , etc ( LAN part ) .
I can get as much as much as 11MB/s with torrents - no crash , no freeze .
WiFi works extremely well too.Mine is 4 years old - and I have NEVER had any problems with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MSI RG54G3 does 100Mb/s with NAT, URL filtering, port mapping, etc, etc (LAN part).
I can get as much as much as 11MB/s with torrents - no crash, no freeze.
WiFi works extremely well too.Mine is 4 years old - and I have NEVER had any problems with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248796</id>
	<title>2 options: business hw or cheap pc with linux</title>
	<author>meverts</author>
	<datestamp>1259315820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
A little overkill perhaps, but something like this (around $500) is a good option....

<a href="http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/security/ssg-series/ssg5/" title="juniper.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/security/ssg-series/ssg5/</a> [juniper.net]

Alternatively, pretty much any PC with two network interfaces running something like Smoothwall or IPCop should do the trick:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_router\_or\_firewall\_distributions" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_router\_or\_firewall\_distributions</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>A little overkill perhaps , but something like this ( around $ 500 ) is a good option... . http : //www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/security/ssg-series/ssg5/ [ juniper.net ] Alternatively , pretty much any PC with two network interfaces running something like Smoothwall or IPCop should do the trick : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _Linux \ _router \ _or \ _firewall \ _distributions [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
A little overkill perhaps, but something like this (around $500) is a good option....

http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/security/ssg-series/ssg5/ [juniper.net]

Alternatively, pretty much any PC with two network interfaces running something like Smoothwall or IPCop should do the trick:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Linux\_router\_or\_firewall\_distributions [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252576</id>
	<title>an old computer with good network cards (2)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259345100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>P90 or whatever, add Linux, shake, have fun<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>P90 or whatever , add Linux , shake , have fun : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>P90 or whatever, add Linux, shake, have fun :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249058</id>
	<title>use a real computer</title>
	<author>madbavarian</author>
	<datestamp>1259316960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to route things at speed why use something based on an anemic ARM chip running a few hundred megahertz when you have a multi gigahertz cpu at your disposal?  I just dual-port my main computer and have it route and nat things.  Routing works at least to 700 Mbits/sec.  If I ever move to a country where gigabit ethernet to the home is available at a reasonable price (like in Japan where it is ~$100), then I'll have to revisit the routing situation.</p><p>(My setup is an athlon64 at 2Ghz, two linksys pci gigabit ethernet cards, fedora and iptables doing the NAT-ing.  The computer is on 24/7 anyway because it serves web pages and accepts my email, so having it do the routing doesn't really increase my power bill.  If power ever becomes an issue, I'll just move the server to an old laptop which will cut my power from 80watts to 20watts.  That admittedly still isn't as low as an ARM chip, but you do get quite a bit more performance for your money.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to route things at speed why use something based on an anemic ARM chip running a few hundred megahertz when you have a multi gigahertz cpu at your disposal ?
I just dual-port my main computer and have it route and nat things .
Routing works at least to 700 Mbits/sec .
If I ever move to a country where gigabit ethernet to the home is available at a reasonable price ( like in Japan where it is ~ $ 100 ) , then I 'll have to revisit the routing situation .
( My setup is an athlon64 at 2Ghz , two linksys pci gigabit ethernet cards , fedora and iptables doing the NAT-ing .
The computer is on 24/7 anyway because it serves web pages and accepts my email , so having it do the routing does n't really increase my power bill .
If power ever becomes an issue , I 'll just move the server to an old laptop which will cut my power from 80watts to 20watts .
That admittedly still is n't as low as an ARM chip , but you do get quite a bit more performance for your money .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to route things at speed why use something based on an anemic ARM chip running a few hundred megahertz when you have a multi gigahertz cpu at your disposal?
I just dual-port my main computer and have it route and nat things.
Routing works at least to 700 Mbits/sec.
If I ever move to a country where gigabit ethernet to the home is available at a reasonable price (like in Japan where it is ~$100), then I'll have to revisit the routing situation.
(My setup is an athlon64 at 2Ghz, two linksys pci gigabit ethernet cards, fedora and iptables doing the NAT-ing.
The computer is on 24/7 anyway because it serves web pages and accepts my email, so having it do the routing doesn't really increase my power bill.
If power ever becomes an issue, I'll just move the server to an old laptop which will cut my power from 80watts to 20watts.
That admittedly still isn't as low as an ARM chip, but you do get quite a bit more performance for your money.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249384</id>
	<title>Re:I Beg To Differ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I honoustly don't get what all the fuzz is about.<br>I'm on a 100/100 fiber network (campus) for years, running behind the cheapest router I could find.<br>It's a Konig cmp-something, and I usually get 11mb/s download speeds when downloading from<br>decent servers - or other campus users on DC++ ofcourse.<br>The darn thing costs like &euro;30 or so, and even comes with 802.11bg with wpa2/enterprise (through a Radius server).<br>My folks bought a Lynksys - it broke within a month. Just go cheap!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I honoustly do n't get what all the fuzz is about.I 'm on a 100/100 fiber network ( campus ) for years , running behind the cheapest router I could find.It 's a Konig cmp-something , and I usually get 11mb/s download speeds when downloading fromdecent servers - or other campus users on DC + + ofcourse.The darn thing costs like    30 or so , and even comes with 802.11bg with wpa2/enterprise ( through a Radius server ) .My folks bought a Lynksys - it broke within a month .
Just go cheap !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honoustly don't get what all the fuzz is about.I'm on a 100/100 fiber network (campus) for years, running behind the cheapest router I could find.It's a Konig cmp-something, and I usually get 11mb/s download speeds when downloading fromdecent servers - or other campus users on DC++ ofcourse.The darn thing costs like €30 or so, and even comes with 802.11bg with wpa2/enterprise (through a Radius server).My folks bought a Lynksys - it broke within a month.
Just go cheap!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30258864</id>
	<title>pfSense</title>
	<author>yakatz</author>
	<datestamp>1259426820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am running pfSense on an 8 year-old PC with two network cards. It can gets throughput like that.</p><p>If you want ultra-low power, you can use the Embedded version of pfSense running off a CompactFlash card and then you will not have a hard-drive running.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am running pfSense on an 8 year-old PC with two network cards .
It can gets throughput like that.If you want ultra-low power , you can use the Embedded version of pfSense running off a CompactFlash card and then you will not have a hard-drive running .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am running pfSense on an 8 year-old PC with two network cards.
It can gets throughput like that.If you want ultra-low power, you can use the Embedded version of pfSense running off a CompactFlash card and then you will not have a hard-drive running.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>BLKMGK</author>
	<datestamp>1259318700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what would I use if I'm also looking for wireless? Something in an N flavor that has two radios? I'd like to be able to load custom firmware (I run Tomato on a 54GS), get N performance, and be able to also run G devices without knocking down N performance. So far as I know this doesn't exist although I've seen mention of a small number of N devices that can run 3rd party firmware.</p><p>Honestly, I need this sooner rather than later as my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy(ish) torrent loads. The wireless dies and then not too long after so does the wired out to the 'net but it routes inside just fine.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-( I would be up for building out say an ATOM based small computer running Linux to do this if I could get one with dual NICs and support for G and N wireless cards. Price is less the issue than performance...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what would I use if I 'm also looking for wireless ?
Something in an N flavor that has two radios ?
I 'd like to be able to load custom firmware ( I run Tomato on a 54GS ) , get N performance , and be able to also run G devices without knocking down N performance .
So far as I know this does n't exist although I 've seen mention of a small number of N devices that can run 3rd party firmware.Honestly , I need this sooner rather than later as my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy ( ish ) torrent loads .
The wireless dies and then not too long after so does the wired out to the 'net but it routes inside just fine .
: - ( I would be up for building out say an ATOM based small computer running Linux to do this if I could get one with dual NICs and support for G and N wireless cards .
Price is less the issue than performance.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what would I use if I'm also looking for wireless?
Something in an N flavor that has two radios?
I'd like to be able to load custom firmware (I run Tomato on a 54GS), get N performance, and be able to also run G devices without knocking down N performance.
So far as I know this doesn't exist although I've seen mention of a small number of N devices that can run 3rd party firmware.Honestly, I need this sooner rather than later as my WRT54GS has been locking up under heavy(ish) torrent loads.
The wireless dies and then not too long after so does the wired out to the 'net but it routes inside just fine.
:-( I would be up for building out say an ATOM based small computer running Linux to do this if I could get one with dual NICs and support for G and N wireless cards.
Price is less the issue than performance...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253136</id>
	<title>pfSense would be awesome but ...</title>
	<author>Hohlraum</author>
	<datestamp>1259441460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it doesn't work very well with my ps3.  I've got it running on an old p4-2.8gz machine with gig interfaces.  handles my 60Mbit connection at full speed</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it does n't work very well with my ps3 .
I 've got it running on an old p4-2.8gz machine with gig interfaces .
handles my 60Mbit connection at full speed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it doesn't work very well with my ps3.
I've got it running on an old p4-2.8gz machine with gig interfaces.
handles my 60Mbit connection at full speed</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249712</id>
	<title>routerBOARD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259320440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can recommend a router from the routerBOARD series (www.routerboard.com). I have one of their cheaper models, the RB433. It can handle my 100/5 cable connection at home just fine even though I have quite a few NAT rules, a strict firewall policy as well as extensive QoS bandwidth shaping. I highly recommend it.</p><p>If you're looking for something a little bit more "mainstream", look for a D-Link DIR-855 or one of the Linksys/Cisco 200&euro;-class routers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can recommend a router from the routerBOARD series ( www.routerboard.com ) .
I have one of their cheaper models , the RB433 .
It can handle my 100/5 cable connection at home just fine even though I have quite a few NAT rules , a strict firewall policy as well as extensive QoS bandwidth shaping .
I highly recommend it.If you 're looking for something a little bit more " mainstream " , look for a D-Link DIR-855 or one of the Linksys/Cisco 200    -class routers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can recommend a router from the routerBOARD series (www.routerboard.com).
I have one of their cheaper models, the RB433.
It can handle my 100/5 cable connection at home just fine even though I have quite a few NAT rules, a strict firewall policy as well as extensive QoS bandwidth shaping.
I highly recommend it.If you're looking for something a little bit more "mainstream", look for a D-Link DIR-855 or one of the Linksys/Cisco 200€-class routers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251706</id>
	<title>Mikrotik RouterBoards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259333220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mikrotik (http://mikrotik.com/) makes the RouterBoard (http://routerboard.com/) series of routers than can route 100mbps.  Their entry level model is just $40, but I can't tell if it will actually handled 100 meg through it's NAT.  http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=56</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mikrotik ( http : //mikrotik.com/ ) makes the RouterBoard ( http : //routerboard.com/ ) series of routers than can route 100mbps .
Their entry level model is just $ 40 , but I ca n't tell if it will actually handled 100 meg through it 's NAT .
http : //routerboard.com/pricelist.php ? showProduct = 56</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mikrotik (http://mikrotik.com/) makes the RouterBoard (http://routerboard.com/) series of routers than can route 100mbps.
Their entry level model is just $40, but I can't tell if it will actually handled 100 meg through it's NAT.
http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=56</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30274934</id>
	<title>Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1259576580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My D-Link something-or-other (Wireless-N, Gigabit Ethernet) started dying last month, so I upgraded to a Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH. The main reason I went for the Buffalo is extended range... this sucker really does put out 500mW or more, rather than the usual wimpy http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/30889-buffalo-nfiniti-wireless-n-high-power-router-a-access-point-reviewed</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My D-Link something-or-other ( Wireless-N , Gigabit Ethernet ) started dying last month , so I upgraded to a Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH .
The main reason I went for the Buffalo is extended range... this sucker really does put out 500mW or more , rather than the usual wimpy http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/30889-buffalo-nfiniti-wireless-n-high-power-router-a-access-point-reviewed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My D-Link something-or-other (Wireless-N, Gigabit Ethernet) started dying last month, so I upgraded to a Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH.
The main reason I went for the Buffalo is extended range... this sucker really does put out 500mW or more, rather than the usual wimpy http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/30889-buffalo-nfiniti-wireless-n-high-power-router-a-access-point-reviewed</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248848</id>
	<title>Linux firewall + gigabit switch</title>
	<author>steveha</author>
	<datestamp>1259316060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could do what I do: use a compact computer with two NICs (motherboard NIC plus a PCI 3Com NIC) as the firewall.  Run <a href="http://devil-linux.org/" title="devil-linux.org">Devil-Linux</a> [devil-linux.org] from a read-only device.  Then, the inside of your firewall can be a gigabit switch.  Devil-Linux is pretty easy to configure, although perhaps not quite as easy as a consumer firewall/router with a good web-based GUI.  You can boot Devil-Linux from a CD drive, with a write-protected floppy holding your settings; you can roll a custom CD with the settings burned onto it; or you can use a write-protected USB flash drive for everything.  No hard drive is needed.</p><p>Pro: Fastest possible throughput and lowest latency; excellent security.<br>Con: Will consume more electricity at idle than a consumer firewall/router box.</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could do what I do : use a compact computer with two NICs ( motherboard NIC plus a PCI 3Com NIC ) as the firewall .
Run Devil-Linux [ devil-linux.org ] from a read-only device .
Then , the inside of your firewall can be a gigabit switch .
Devil-Linux is pretty easy to configure , although perhaps not quite as easy as a consumer firewall/router with a good web-based GUI .
You can boot Devil-Linux from a CD drive , with a write-protected floppy holding your settings ; you can roll a custom CD with the settings burned onto it ; or you can use a write-protected USB flash drive for everything .
No hard drive is needed.Pro : Fastest possible throughput and lowest latency ; excellent security.Con : Will consume more electricity at idle than a consumer firewall/router box.steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could do what I do: use a compact computer with two NICs (motherboard NIC plus a PCI 3Com NIC) as the firewall.
Run Devil-Linux [devil-linux.org] from a read-only device.
Then, the inside of your firewall can be a gigabit switch.
Devil-Linux is pretty easy to configure, although perhaps not quite as easy as a consumer firewall/router with a good web-based GUI.
You can boot Devil-Linux from a CD drive, with a write-protected floppy holding your settings; you can roll a custom CD with the settings burned onto it; or you can use a write-protected USB flash drive for everything.
No hard drive is needed.Pro: Fastest possible throughput and lowest latency; excellent security.Con: Will consume more electricity at idle than a consumer firewall/router box.steveha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250890</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259326920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry. Can't run PF on it.</p><p>FAIL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry .
Ca n't run PF on it.FAIL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry.
Can't run PF on it.FAIL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255948</id>
	<title>Re:You poor bastard</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1259438400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence, and somehow, god-willing, find a reason to keep on living</i></p><p>Yeah, especially since he's going to hit his monthly cap in less than five minutes and get his account cancelled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence , and somehow , god-willing , find a reason to keep on livingYeah , especially since he 's going to hit his monthly cap in less than five minutes and get his account cancelled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence, and somehow, god-willing, find a reason to keep on livingYeah, especially since he's going to hit his monthly cap in less than five minutes and get his account cancelled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256402</id>
	<title>Re:Cisco</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259399460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore. Does 150Mbps according to Cisco.</p></div><p>Actually, looking at their specs page, something seems wrong.  The ASA 5505 contains only 10/100 Mbps ports, yet they claim that it has a firewall throughput of 150Mbps.</p><p>http://tinyurl.com/d9923</p><p>What gives?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore .
Does 150Mbps according to Cisco.Actually , looking at their specs page , something seems wrong .
The ASA 5505 contains only 10/100 Mbps ports , yet they claim that it has a firewall throughput of 150Mbps.http : //tinyurl.com/d9923What gives ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore.
Does 150Mbps according to Cisco.Actually, looking at their specs page, something seems wrong.
The ASA 5505 contains only 10/100 Mbps ports, yet they claim that it has a firewall throughput of 150Mbps.http://tinyurl.com/d9923What gives?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248778</id>
	<title>Cisco</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259315760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check out ebay for a used Cisco router.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out ebay for a used Cisco router .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out ebay for a used Cisco router.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251542</id>
	<title>Dlink has fine routers</title>
	<author>Lobais</author>
	<datestamp>1259331660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When we got 100/100 fiber we had a lot of problems with our router. Eventually the ISP actually sent us a very nice router as an excuse for a couple of things.<br>The router is a Dlink DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router and the internet has worked flawlessly ever since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When we got 100/100 fiber we had a lot of problems with our router .
Eventually the ISP actually sent us a very nice router as an excuse for a couple of things.The router is a Dlink DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router and the internet has worked flawlessly ever since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When we got 100/100 fiber we had a lot of problems with our router.
Eventually the ISP actually sent us a very nice router as an excuse for a couple of things.The router is a Dlink DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router and the internet has worked flawlessly ever since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249442</id>
	<title>Re:Cisco</title>
	<author>zn0k</author>
	<datestamp>1259319060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 150Mbps stands when multiple interfaces are used simultaneously. ASA5505s have 100Mbps interfaces.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 150Mbps stands when multiple interfaces are used simultaneously .
ASA5505s have 100Mbps interfaces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 150Mbps stands when multiple interfaces are used simultaneously.
ASA5505s have 100Mbps interfaces.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249274</id>
	<title>Soekris Net55501 + m0n0wall</title>
	<author>AMuse</author>
	<datestamp>1259318280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had fantastic luck with m0n0wall on a Soekris Net5501 box - The hardware was basically built for routing, switching and firewalling and m0n0wall is a great distribution.</p><p>Hit www.soekris.com for info on the products.  (I have no financial connection whatsoever, just a satisfied customer)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had fantastic luck with m0n0wall on a Soekris Net5501 box - The hardware was basically built for routing , switching and firewalling and m0n0wall is a great distribution.Hit www.soekris.com for info on the products .
( I have no financial connection whatsoever , just a satisfied customer )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had fantastic luck with m0n0wall on a Soekris Net5501 box - The hardware was basically built for routing, switching and firewalling and m0n0wall is a great distribution.Hit www.soekris.com for info on the products.
(I have no financial connection whatsoever, just a satisfied customer)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249096</id>
	<title>Re:Linux PC</title>
	<author>TSHTF</author>
	<datestamp>1259317260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Cisco ASA 5505 is a good choice, but prepared for a bit of a learning curve. For ASA 8.2, the command reference guide weighs in a 3534 pages. If the command-line scares you away, the integrated web management (ASDM) works well for what it is. The 5505 has no fan, provides an 8 port switch (including 2 PoE ports), and is probably slightly greener than an old box running Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Cisco ASA 5505 is a good choice , but prepared for a bit of a learning curve .
For ASA 8.2 , the command reference guide weighs in a 3534 pages .
If the command-line scares you away , the integrated web management ( ASDM ) works well for what it is .
The 5505 has no fan , provides an 8 port switch ( including 2 PoE ports ) , and is probably slightly greener than an old box running Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Cisco ASA 5505 is a good choice, but prepared for a bit of a learning curve.
For ASA 8.2, the command reference guide weighs in a 3534 pages.
If the command-line scares you away, the integrated web management (ASDM) works well for what it is.
The 5505 has no fan, provides an 8 port switch (including 2 PoE ports), and is probably slightly greener than an old box running Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252174</id>
	<title>netgear wnr3500l?</title>
	<author>mczak</author>
	<datestamp>1259339160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok this one was dissed due to being advertized as "open source router".
However, I looked at the specs and from all the cheapie routers this one actually seems to have the best hardware specs. It's got a apparently quite fast cpu (broadcom 4718 at 480Mhz, supposedly mips 74k core said to be much faster than the older broadcom 470x chips), it's got 8MB flash, 64MB ram. Might not be open source but should run dd-wrt... For what it's worth, netgear advertizes it with 350mbit wan to lan throughput, make of that number what you will...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok this one was dissed due to being advertized as " open source router " .
However , I looked at the specs and from all the cheapie routers this one actually seems to have the best hardware specs .
It 's got a apparently quite fast cpu ( broadcom 4718 at 480Mhz , supposedly mips 74k core said to be much faster than the older broadcom 470x chips ) , it 's got 8MB flash , 64MB ram .
Might not be open source but should run dd-wrt... For what it 's worth , netgear advertizes it with 350mbit wan to lan throughput , make of that number what you will.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok this one was dissed due to being advertized as "open source router".
However, I looked at the specs and from all the cheapie routers this one actually seems to have the best hardware specs.
It's got a apparently quite fast cpu (broadcom 4718 at 480Mhz, supposedly mips 74k core said to be much faster than the older broadcom 470x chips), it's got 8MB flash, 64MB ram.
Might not be open source but should run dd-wrt... For what it's worth, netgear advertizes it with 350mbit wan to lan throughput, make of that number what you will...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251230</id>
	<title>Unicom</title>
	<author>Plekto</author>
	<datestamp>1259328840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.calcentron.com/Pages/unicom/unicom\_networking\_equip/unicom\_fast\_enet\_switches.htm" title="calcentron.com">http://www.calcentron.com/Pages/unicom/unicom\_networking\_equip/unicom\_fast\_enet\_switches.htm</a> [calcentron.com]</p><p>I use these and they are not only small but work flawlessly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.calcentron.com/Pages/unicom/unicom \ _networking \ _equip/unicom \ _fast \ _enet \ _switches.htm [ calcentron.com ] I use these and they are not only small but work flawlessly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.calcentron.com/Pages/unicom/unicom\_networking\_equip/unicom\_fast\_enet\_switches.htm [calcentron.com]I use these and they are not only small but work flawlessly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250784</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259326080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have had a lot of success both at home and at work (1000 users) running astaro over on intel.  I use a 4 core box loaded with vmware esxi (free) so I also use it for a webserver, fileserver, and windows apps.  Astaro is free for home use (up to 50 users I think) and has about every feature you could ask for (DNS, DHCP, intrusion protection, content filtering for the kids, email spam filtering, IM control, malware, AV scanning, etc).  Take a look.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have had a lot of success both at home and at work ( 1000 users ) running astaro over on intel .
I use a 4 core box loaded with vmware esxi ( free ) so I also use it for a webserver , fileserver , and windows apps .
Astaro is free for home use ( up to 50 users I think ) and has about every feature you could ask for ( DNS , DHCP , intrusion protection , content filtering for the kids , email spam filtering , IM control , malware , AV scanning , etc ) .
Take a look .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have had a lot of success both at home and at work (1000 users) running astaro over on intel.
I use a 4 core box loaded with vmware esxi (free) so I also use it for a webserver, fileserver, and windows apps.
Astaro is free for home use (up to 50 users I think) and has about every feature you could ask for (DNS, DHCP, intrusion protection, content filtering for the kids, email spam filtering, IM control, malware, AV scanning, etc).
Take a look.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250196</id>
	<title>Dave</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a Linksys WRT150N with dd-wrt on it. When I used it on my school connection, at RIT, I could get a bit over 100 mbit on speedtest.net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Linksys WRT150N with dd-wrt on it .
When I used it on my school connection , at RIT , I could get a bit over 100 mbit on speedtest.net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Linksys WRT150N with dd-wrt on it.
When I used it on my school connection, at RIT, I could get a bit over 100 mbit on speedtest.net.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253012</id>
	<title>What D-Link router is this, please?</title>
	<author>SeaFox</author>
	<datestamp>1259439120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Drat, I wish the writer had said what kind of D-Link router he's using. Our own Internet service was recently upgraded from 21 Mbps to 50 Mbps and we have been having issues with it since then. We also use a D-Link router (DIR-655) and haven't figured out if the issue is the modem (had to trade in our Motorola Surfboard 5100 for a new Arris that supports DOCSIS 3.0), the router, or the service itself since it is a new speed range for our provider, maybe they haven't gotten all the bugs worked out yet.</p><p>It will work great part of the time, sometimes it seems to be connected but service moves at such a trickle most things time out, sometimes resetting the router fixes this, sometimes we have to reset the modem, and it happens quite often late at night when it's hard to get support for the issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drat , I wish the writer had said what kind of D-Link router he 's using .
Our own Internet service was recently upgraded from 21 Mbps to 50 Mbps and we have been having issues with it since then .
We also use a D-Link router ( DIR-655 ) and have n't figured out if the issue is the modem ( had to trade in our Motorola Surfboard 5100 for a new Arris that supports DOCSIS 3.0 ) , the router , or the service itself since it is a new speed range for our provider , maybe they have n't gotten all the bugs worked out yet.It will work great part of the time , sometimes it seems to be connected but service moves at such a trickle most things time out , sometimes resetting the router fixes this , sometimes we have to reset the modem , and it happens quite often late at night when it 's hard to get support for the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drat, I wish the writer had said what kind of D-Link router he's using.
Our own Internet service was recently upgraded from 21 Mbps to 50 Mbps and we have been having issues with it since then.
We also use a D-Link router (DIR-655) and haven't figured out if the issue is the modem (had to trade in our Motorola Surfboard 5100 for a new Arris that supports DOCSIS 3.0), the router, or the service itself since it is a new speed range for our provider, maybe they haven't gotten all the bugs worked out yet.It will work great part of the time, sometimes it seems to be connected but service moves at such a trickle most things time out, sometimes resetting the router fixes this, sometimes we have to reset the modem, and it happens quite often late at night when it's hard to get support for the issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249122</id>
	<title>Asus RT-N16</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259317380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While WRT54G and a few others are good routers, they are a little bit underpowered. No 802.11n. No gigabit. Only 4MB flash and 16MB ram (if not 2 and 8 for the worst revisions). 200 MHz CPU. No 5 GHz radio.</p><p>May I suggest :</p><p>Asus RT-N16 :<br>Gigabit switch, 802.11n, USB, 533 MHz CPU (probably the bottleneck on your dlink), 128MB RAM, 32MB flash. DD-WRT supported. OpenWRT support WIP.<br>Only downside is that it does not support the 5 GHz frequency so I wouldn't use it in a large appartment building.</p><p>Other good choice :<br>Netgear WNDR3700 : 680 MHz MIPS CPU, 2.4Ghz+5GHz simultaneous radios, Gigabit switch, USB, 64MB RAM, 8MB Flash. It's supposed to come with an old (linux 2.6.15) version of OpenWRT out of the box.</p><p>If you want to stick with cheaper and older hardware, one of the best is the Asus WL-500g Premium v1 :<br>mini-PCI wireless-G (I replaced mine with an atheros 802.11abg), USB, 266 MHz CPU, 8MB flash, 32MB ram. OpenWRT and DD-wrt supported.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While WRT54G and a few others are good routers , they are a little bit underpowered .
No 802.11n .
No gigabit .
Only 4MB flash and 16MB ram ( if not 2 and 8 for the worst revisions ) .
200 MHz CPU .
No 5 GHz radio.May I suggest : Asus RT-N16 : Gigabit switch , 802.11n , USB , 533 MHz CPU ( probably the bottleneck on your dlink ) , 128MB RAM , 32MB flash .
DD-WRT supported .
OpenWRT support WIP.Only downside is that it does not support the 5 GHz frequency so I would n't use it in a large appartment building.Other good choice : Netgear WNDR3700 : 680 MHz MIPS CPU , 2.4Ghz + 5GHz simultaneous radios , Gigabit switch , USB , 64MB RAM , 8MB Flash .
It 's supposed to come with an old ( linux 2.6.15 ) version of OpenWRT out of the box.If you want to stick with cheaper and older hardware , one of the best is the Asus WL-500g Premium v1 : mini-PCI wireless-G ( I replaced mine with an atheros 802.11abg ) , USB , 266 MHz CPU , 8MB flash , 32MB ram .
OpenWRT and DD-wrt supported .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While WRT54G and a few others are good routers, they are a little bit underpowered.
No 802.11n.
No gigabit.
Only 4MB flash and 16MB ram (if not 2 and 8 for the worst revisions).
200 MHz CPU.
No 5 GHz radio.May I suggest :Asus RT-N16 :Gigabit switch, 802.11n, USB, 533 MHz CPU (probably the bottleneck on your dlink), 128MB RAM, 32MB flash.
DD-WRT supported.
OpenWRT support WIP.Only downside is that it does not support the 5 GHz frequency so I wouldn't use it in a large appartment building.Other good choice :Netgear WNDR3700 : 680 MHz MIPS CPU, 2.4Ghz+5GHz simultaneous radios, Gigabit switch, USB, 64MB RAM, 8MB Flash.
It's supposed to come with an old (linux 2.6.15) version of OpenWRT out of the box.If you want to stick with cheaper and older hardware, one of the best is the Asus WL-500g Premium v1 :mini-PCI wireless-G (I replaced mine with an atheros 802.11abg), USB, 266 MHz CPU, 8MB flash, 32MB ram.
OpenWRT and DD-wrt supported.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248802</id>
	<title>Buy used hardware</title>
	<author>rongage</author>
	<datestamp>1259315880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an old Dell PowerEdge 350 that I used for quite some time as my home router/Asterisk box.  Just recently retired it - replaced it with a VMWare ESXi 4.0 box with a single VM running my router/Asterisk instance.  Works like a charm too.</p><p>Find someone who has an old rack mount server for sale (eBay is your friend, so is CraigsList), install a Linux Distro of your choice and unless you are trying to run a BGP instance with a full view, you should be fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an old Dell PowerEdge 350 that I used for quite some time as my home router/Asterisk box .
Just recently retired it - replaced it with a VMWare ESXi 4.0 box with a single VM running my router/Asterisk instance .
Works like a charm too.Find someone who has an old rack mount server for sale ( eBay is your friend , so is CraigsList ) , install a Linux Distro of your choice and unless you are trying to run a BGP instance with a full view , you should be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an old Dell PowerEdge 350 that I used for quite some time as my home router/Asterisk box.
Just recently retired it - replaced it with a VMWare ESXi 4.0 box with a single VM running my router/Asterisk instance.
Works like a charm too.Find someone who has an old rack mount server for sale (eBay is your friend, so is CraigsList), install a Linux Distro of your choice and unless you are trying to run a BGP instance with a full view, you should be fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30272276</id>
	<title>Graduate to a real router</title>
	<author>uncledrax</author>
	<datestamp>1259608680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been pretty  happy with my Cisco 1800 series at home.</p><p>Alternatively, you could do the whole PC-Wirewall/router thing.. if you do, sink time into getting a few real NICs.. not all NICs are equal!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been pretty happy with my Cisco 1800 series at home.Alternatively , you could do the whole PC-Wirewall/router thing.. if you do , sink time into getting a few real NICs.. not all NICs are equal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been pretty  happy with my Cisco 1800 series at home.Alternatively, you could do the whole PC-Wirewall/router thing.. if you do, sink time into getting a few real NICs.. not all NICs are equal!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250540</id>
	<title>Avalible connections</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259324880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lots of open TCP connections will load down the router more than raw bandwidth usage. 20 Mbit/s of bittorrent is far more demanding for the router than 100 Mbit/s of FTP.</p><p>Any fairly modern home router can probably handle a 100/100 as long as you don't load it down with heavy bittorrent usage. If you need more power, you could use an old laptop with m0n0wall. Laptops are often quite power efficent and not very noisy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of open TCP connections will load down the router more than raw bandwidth usage .
20 Mbit/s of bittorrent is far more demanding for the router than 100 Mbit/s of FTP.Any fairly modern home router can probably handle a 100/100 as long as you do n't load it down with heavy bittorrent usage .
If you need more power , you could use an old laptop with m0n0wall .
Laptops are often quite power efficent and not very noisy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of open TCP connections will load down the router more than raw bandwidth usage.
20 Mbit/s of bittorrent is far more demanding for the router than 100 Mbit/s of FTP.Any fairly modern home router can probably handle a 100/100 as long as you don't load it down with heavy bittorrent usage.
If you need more power, you could use an old laptop with m0n0wall.
Laptops are often quite power efficent and not very noisy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250734</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Zephiris</author>
	<datestamp>1259325960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People recommend OpenWRT all the time, but when I tested with an Asus WL-520GU (virtually identical to the Linksys WRT54GL), the web UI and wireless drivers had serious CPU/IRQ problems on both OpenWRT and DD-WRT, even with wireless disabled, even with the very newest stable versions.</p><p>The Tomato firmware (some versions of which are modified/newer; it's not unmaintained on existing supported hardware), which runs on such devices, and has a much prettier (and functional) web interface has had no such issues or rebooting problems, regardless of the attached speed or wireless functionality. The 520gU also supports a USB port, which you can use with a hard drive or even crappy-cheap USB key to add swap and local storage. (The problems are solved on Tomato even without adding swap.) You can run bittorrent, TOR, and pretty much anything you want if it has a package (via optware), or you can cross-compile.</p><p>
&nbsp; OpenWRT has native on-router compiler available through the same system, but the aforementioned problems seem to make it a moot point. OpenWRT seems like it might be better on stuff like the NetGear 3500L, which doubles most specs (480Mhz instead of 240, 64MB of ram instead of 16, 8MB flash instead of 4, n wireless instead of g).</p><p>There's also the point that Tomato is considerably easier to set up (and has inspiring bandwidth/classification tables/graphs to verify the QoS is actually having an effect) and manage unless you explicitly love the command line of iptables, or happen to enjoy Luci (which acts like a real pain on such hardware and has a habit of causing reboots, on both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People recommend OpenWRT all the time , but when I tested with an Asus WL-520GU ( virtually identical to the Linksys WRT54GL ) , the web UI and wireless drivers had serious CPU/IRQ problems on both OpenWRT and DD-WRT , even with wireless disabled , even with the very newest stable versions.The Tomato firmware ( some versions of which are modified/newer ; it 's not unmaintained on existing supported hardware ) , which runs on such devices , and has a much prettier ( and functional ) web interface has had no such issues or rebooting problems , regardless of the attached speed or wireless functionality .
The 520gU also supports a USB port , which you can use with a hard drive or even crappy-cheap USB key to add swap and local storage .
( The problems are solved on Tomato even without adding swap .
) You can run bittorrent , TOR , and pretty much anything you want if it has a package ( via optware ) , or you can cross-compile .
  OpenWRT has native on-router compiler available through the same system , but the aforementioned problems seem to make it a moot point .
OpenWRT seems like it might be better on stuff like the NetGear 3500L , which doubles most specs ( 480Mhz instead of 240 , 64MB of ram instead of 16 , 8MB flash instead of 4 , n wireless instead of g ) .There 's also the point that Tomato is considerably easier to set up ( and has inspiring bandwidth/classification tables/graphs to verify the QoS is actually having an effect ) and manage unless you explicitly love the command line of iptables , or happen to enjoy Luci ( which acts like a real pain on such hardware and has a habit of causing reboots , on both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People recommend OpenWRT all the time, but when I tested with an Asus WL-520GU (virtually identical to the Linksys WRT54GL), the web UI and wireless drivers had serious CPU/IRQ problems on both OpenWRT and DD-WRT, even with wireless disabled, even with the very newest stable versions.The Tomato firmware (some versions of which are modified/newer; it's not unmaintained on existing supported hardware), which runs on such devices, and has a much prettier (and functional) web interface has had no such issues or rebooting problems, regardless of the attached speed or wireless functionality.
The 520gU also supports a USB port, which you can use with a hard drive or even crappy-cheap USB key to add swap and local storage.
(The problems are solved on Tomato even without adding swap.
) You can run bittorrent, TOR, and pretty much anything you want if it has a package (via optware), or you can cross-compile.
  OpenWRT has native on-router compiler available through the same system, but the aforementioned problems seem to make it a moot point.
OpenWRT seems like it might be better on stuff like the NetGear 3500L, which doubles most specs (480Mhz instead of 240, 64MB of ram instead of 16, 8MB flash instead of 4, n wireless instead of g).There's also the point that Tomato is considerably easier to set up (and has inspiring bandwidth/classification tables/graphs to verify the QoS is actually having an effect) and manage unless you explicitly love the command line of iptables, or happen to enjoy Luci (which acts like a real pain on such hardware and has a habit of causing reboots, on both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256108</id>
	<title>Re:I Beg To Differ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am also using a DIR-665 for my 100/100 mbit fiber line, and I get consistently full utilization, even with several hundreds of connections at the same time (think bittorrent).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am also using a DIR-665 for my 100/100 mbit fiber line , and I get consistently full utilization , even with several hundreds of connections at the same time ( think bittorrent ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am also using a DIR-665 for my 100/100 mbit fiber line, and I get consistently full utilization, even with several hundreds of connections at the same time (think bittorrent).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251662</id>
	<title>You probably just have some sticky packets</title>
	<author>kent\_eh</author>
	<datestamp>1259332740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You need some <a href="http://thepackets.net/PacketLube.jpg" title="thepackets.net">packet lube</a> [thepackets.net] to get them flowing smoothly again!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You need some packet lube [ thepackets.net ] to get them flowing smoothly again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need some packet lube [thepackets.net] to get them flowing smoothly again!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253386</id>
	<title>Lots of consumer routers can handle this today</title>
	<author>matbe</author>
	<datestamp>1259404260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In some countries, like here in Sweden, this was a problem 8-9 years or so ago (when we started getting 100/100mbit at home) and was under much discussion then, but I fail to see how it is a problem now. There are plenty of consumer home routers now that can handle this.
I can highly recommend the more expensive DLINK routers, yes I know, the cheaper ones are<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not very good. Have a look at the DIR-655 or all of the DIR8xx series, excellent in my and many others experience. Stable, fast, never needed a reboot and has no performance problems for high-speed downloads, be it direct downloads from a single source or hundreds/thousands of connections in torrents. Have no problems maxing out my 100/100 connection. Even has traffic shaping so your downloads or uploads don't interfere (noticeably) with your gaming or browsing etc.
<br> <br>
Pfsenese or m0n0wall might be more fun though, but if you don't run it on some small embedded device (but still have to find one powerful enough) it will draw more power than a small modern above average home router.
<br> <br>
See this chart of actual WAN-LAN throughput for home routers: <a href="http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/" title="smallnetbuilder.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/</a> [smallnetbuilder.com]
<br> <br>
Mind you you will have to use wired not wifi for those speeds.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In some countries , like here in Sweden , this was a problem 8-9 years or so ago ( when we started getting 100/100mbit at home ) and was under much discussion then , but I fail to see how it is a problem now .
There are plenty of consumer home routers now that can handle this .
I can highly recommend the more expensive DLINK routers , yes I know , the cheaper ones are ... not very good .
Have a look at the DIR-655 or all of the DIR8xx series , excellent in my and many others experience .
Stable , fast , never needed a reboot and has no performance problems for high-speed downloads , be it direct downloads from a single source or hundreds/thousands of connections in torrents .
Have no problems maxing out my 100/100 connection .
Even has traffic shaping so your downloads or uploads do n't interfere ( noticeably ) with your gaming or browsing etc .
Pfsenese or m0n0wall might be more fun though , but if you do n't run it on some small embedded device ( but still have to find one powerful enough ) it will draw more power than a small modern above average home router .
See this chart of actual WAN-LAN throughput for home routers : http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com \ _chart/Itemid,189/ [ smallnetbuilder.com ] Mind you you will have to use wired not wifi for those speeds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In some countries, like here in Sweden, this was a problem 8-9 years or so ago (when we started getting 100/100mbit at home) and was under much discussion then, but I fail to see how it is a problem now.
There are plenty of consumer home routers now that can handle this.
I can highly recommend the more expensive DLINK routers, yes I know, the cheaper ones are ... not very good.
Have a look at the DIR-655 or all of the DIR8xx series, excellent in my and many others experience.
Stable, fast, never needed a reboot and has no performance problems for high-speed downloads, be it direct downloads from a single source or hundreds/thousands of connections in torrents.
Have no problems maxing out my 100/100 connection.
Even has traffic shaping so your downloads or uploads don't interfere (noticeably) with your gaming or browsing etc.
Pfsenese or m0n0wall might be more fun though, but if you don't run it on some small embedded device (but still have to find one powerful enough) it will draw more power than a small modern above average home router.
See this chart of actual WAN-LAN throughput for home routers: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/ [smallnetbuilder.com]
 
Mind you you will have to use wired not wifi for those speeds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250564</id>
	<title>What I Do</title>
	<author>DaMattster</author>
	<datestamp>1259325060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have an older Pentium dual-core that runs OpenBSD and has four NIC cards.  One NIC card is for the WAN, the second is for my DMZ, the third is the LAN, and the fourth connects to WAP.  I loaded the Operating system on a flash card and removed the HD to save power.  Not quite as power efficient as the Linksys but much more flexible.  The LAN and WLAN operate on 10.0.1.0/29 and 10.0.2.0/29 respectively.  The DMZ has publicly available addresses.  OpenBSD handles NAT, Firewall/Routing, and IPSEC, OpenSSH Tunneling, and OpenVPN.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an older Pentium dual-core that runs OpenBSD and has four NIC cards .
One NIC card is for the WAN , the second is for my DMZ , the third is the LAN , and the fourth connects to WAP .
I loaded the Operating system on a flash card and removed the HD to save power .
Not quite as power efficient as the Linksys but much more flexible .
The LAN and WLAN operate on 10.0.1.0/29 and 10.0.2.0/29 respectively .
The DMZ has publicly available addresses .
OpenBSD handles NAT , Firewall/Routing , and IPSEC , OpenSSH Tunneling , and OpenVPN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an older Pentium dual-core that runs OpenBSD and has four NIC cards.
One NIC card is for the WAN, the second is for my DMZ, the third is the LAN, and the fourth connects to WAP.
I loaded the Operating system on a flash card and removed the HD to save power.
Not quite as power efficient as the Linksys but much more flexible.
The LAN and WLAN operate on 10.0.1.0/29 and 10.0.2.0/29 respectively.
The DMZ has publicly available addresses.
OpenBSD handles NAT, Firewall/Routing, and IPSEC, OpenSSH Tunneling, and OpenVPN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251092</id>
	<title>Re:WRT-160NL</title>
	<author>sethstorm</author>
	<datestamp>1259328120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's in a usable form right now, just not a stable port to that platform yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's in a usable form right now , just not a stable port to that platform yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's in a usable form right now, just not a stable port to that platform yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249054</id>
	<title>this is on the front page? really?</title>
	<author>xSauronx</author>
	<datestamp>1259316960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is getting more and more ridiculous. Why is the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. front page so regularly putting up basic tech support questions? And what is someone doing reading slashdot when they arent capable of doing a few minutes of googling to find out something basic like this for themselves?
<p>
Maybe slashdot would do well to affiliate itself with a site with regular tech support forums and point such questions that way...or maybe the editors could just pick a forum and point people to it. Arstechnica and Anandtech both have forums with lots of archived threads on all sorts of technical issues and questions, for example. Doubtless there are others.
</p><p>
Someone submitting such a basic question should be pointed to <a href="http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html" title="linuxmafia.com">"How to ask questions the smart way"</a> [linuxmafia.com] and google. Theyd do well to learn how to do things on their own a little bit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is getting more and more ridiculous .
Why is the / .
front page so regularly putting up basic tech support questions ?
And what is someone doing reading slashdot when they arent capable of doing a few minutes of googling to find out something basic like this for themselves ?
Maybe slashdot would do well to affiliate itself with a site with regular tech support forums and point such questions that way...or maybe the editors could just pick a forum and point people to it .
Arstechnica and Anandtech both have forums with lots of archived threads on all sorts of technical issues and questions , for example .
Doubtless there are others .
Someone submitting such a basic question should be pointed to " How to ask questions the smart way " [ linuxmafia.com ] and google .
Theyd do well to learn how to do things on their own a little bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is getting more and more ridiculous.
Why is the /.
front page so regularly putting up basic tech support questions?
And what is someone doing reading slashdot when they arent capable of doing a few minutes of googling to find out something basic like this for themselves?
Maybe slashdot would do well to affiliate itself with a site with regular tech support forums and point such questions that way...or maybe the editors could just pick a forum and point people to it.
Arstechnica and Anandtech both have forums with lots of archived threads on all sorts of technical issues and questions, for example.
Doubtless there are others.
Someone submitting such a basic question should be pointed to "How to ask questions the smart way" [linuxmafia.com] and google.
Theyd do well to learn how to do things on their own a little bit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249470</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Honken</author>
	<datestamp>1259319240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a WRT54GL and a 100/10 conection as well, and I can also confirm that getting above 30-40 Mbps is difficult. With some tweaking seems to be possible to reach 50 perhaps, but then the CPU simply won't handle more traffic. Enabling QoS or other features will obviously decrease this value even more. At first I thought I might have misconfigured something, but after a lot of googling this really seems to be the capacity limit of these routers.
<br> <br>
Looking for an alternative that's quiet, low power and linux friendly I came across the Routerstation Pro <a href="http://www.ubnt.com/products/rspro.php" title="ubnt.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ubnt.com/products/rspro.php</a> [ubnt.com]. It runs the same linux-based firmwares as the WRT line of routers, but with a CPU clocked more than 3 times as high, more RAM and expansion possibilities etc. I have not tested it yet though, but reviews seems promising, routing 100 Mpbs should not be a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a WRT54GL and a 100/10 conection as well , and I can also confirm that getting above 30-40 Mbps is difficult .
With some tweaking seems to be possible to reach 50 perhaps , but then the CPU simply wo n't handle more traffic .
Enabling QoS or other features will obviously decrease this value even more .
At first I thought I might have misconfigured something , but after a lot of googling this really seems to be the capacity limit of these routers .
Looking for an alternative that 's quiet , low power and linux friendly I came across the Routerstation Pro http : //www.ubnt.com/products/rspro.php [ ubnt.com ] .
It runs the same linux-based firmwares as the WRT line of routers , but with a CPU clocked more than 3 times as high , more RAM and expansion possibilities etc .
I have not tested it yet though , but reviews seems promising , routing 100 Mpbs should not be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a WRT54GL and a 100/10 conection as well, and I can also confirm that getting above 30-40 Mbps is difficult.
With some tweaking seems to be possible to reach 50 perhaps, but then the CPU simply won't handle more traffic.
Enabling QoS or other features will obviously decrease this value even more.
At first I thought I might have misconfigured something, but after a lot of googling this really seems to be the capacity limit of these routers.
Looking for an alternative that's quiet, low power and linux friendly I came across the Routerstation Pro http://www.ubnt.com/products/rspro.php [ubnt.com].
It runs the same linux-based firmwares as the WRT line of routers, but with a CPU clocked more than 3 times as high, more RAM and expansion possibilities etc.
I have not tested it yet though, but reviews seems promising, routing 100 Mpbs should not be a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249040</id>
	<title>6-year-old SMC2804</title>
	<author>AliasMarlowe</author>
	<datestamp>1259316900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have a SMC2804WBRP-G router for our home net, with a 100/10 WAN connection through a fiber switch. It handles our traffic smoothly using NAT and firewall with both wired and 11g wireless LAN connections. We've had it for almost 6 years now, and upgraded our WAN connection during that time. The SMC2804 was not particularly expensive, but cost about 50\% more than the Netgear and Buffalo trash of the time. Typically, there are 3-4 PCs, a multifunction printer, and a headless server on our wired LAN, and there may be another PC or two on wireless from time to time. The firewall rules prevent the headless server and printer from calling home, among other things.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have a SMC2804WBRP-G router for our home net , with a 100/10 WAN connection through a fiber switch .
It handles our traffic smoothly using NAT and firewall with both wired and 11g wireless LAN connections .
We 've had it for almost 6 years now , and upgraded our WAN connection during that time .
The SMC2804 was not particularly expensive , but cost about 50 \ % more than the Netgear and Buffalo trash of the time .
Typically , there are 3-4 PCs , a multifunction printer , and a headless server on our wired LAN , and there may be another PC or two on wireless from time to time .
The firewall rules prevent the headless server and printer from calling home , among other things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have a SMC2804WBRP-G router for our home net, with a 100/10 WAN connection through a fiber switch.
It handles our traffic smoothly using NAT and firewall with both wired and 11g wireless LAN connections.
We've had it for almost 6 years now, and upgraded our WAN connection during that time.
The SMC2804 was not particularly expensive, but cost about 50\% more than the Netgear and Buffalo trash of the time.
Typically, there are 3-4 PCs, a multifunction printer, and a headless server on our wired LAN, and there may be another PC or two on wireless from time to time.
The firewall rules prevent the headless server and printer from calling home, among other things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248928</id>
	<title>OpenBSD/Linux box</title>
	<author>seifried</author>
	<datestamp>1259316420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I ran into similar problems, except at 10 megabits most consumer level routers/firewalls tip over well before 10 megabits (several thousand outgoing NAT connections and they die, several hundred and they usually start crawling, plus none had real VPN capabilities). Honestly, your choices are basically: re-purpose an old PC with OpenBSD or Linux (I like OpenBSD because you can set it and forget it), or spend some serious cash on a properly firewall/router/NAT box (an old PC is $1-200 and will give you infinitely more capabilities in any event). If you wanna go small/no moving parts that's easy on the power consumption that's easy, just get a soekris box or a routerboard/routerstation pro device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ran into similar problems , except at 10 megabits most consumer level routers/firewalls tip over well before 10 megabits ( several thousand outgoing NAT connections and they die , several hundred and they usually start crawling , plus none had real VPN capabilities ) .
Honestly , your choices are basically : re-purpose an old PC with OpenBSD or Linux ( I like OpenBSD because you can set it and forget it ) , or spend some serious cash on a properly firewall/router/NAT box ( an old PC is $ 1-200 and will give you infinitely more capabilities in any event ) .
If you wan na go small/no moving parts that 's easy on the power consumption that 's easy , just get a soekris box or a routerboard/routerstation pro device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ran into similar problems, except at 10 megabits most consumer level routers/firewalls tip over well before 10 megabits (several thousand outgoing NAT connections and they die, several hundred and they usually start crawling, plus none had real VPN capabilities).
Honestly, your choices are basically: re-purpose an old PC with OpenBSD or Linux (I like OpenBSD because you can set it and forget it), or spend some serious cash on a properly firewall/router/NAT box (an old PC is $1-200 and will give you infinitely more capabilities in any event).
If you wanna go small/no moving parts that's easy on the power consumption that's easy, just get a soekris box or a routerboard/routerstation pro device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251548</id>
	<title>Cisco ASA5505</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although it doesn't sound like a SOHO solution, Cisco's ASA5505 would be a good choice. It will do up to 150 Mb/s of firewall throughput, or 100 Mb/s of VPN crypto. If you have a small network, the model you want is ASA5505-BUN-K9, which can be bought from many online retailers for under $400. If you aren't comfortable with Cisco's CLI (specifically PIX/ASA), the ASA line now also has a very good GUI which can be used to configure almost anything on the firewall. It mangles object names and such for CLI junkies, but it works well if you always use the GUI.</p><p>There are a few feature restrictions on the base-model 5505, such as a maximum of 10 "inside" hosts getting to the Internet at any one time. Also, while the 5505 base supports 3 VLANs, one of them is restricted and can only really be used as a "guest" segment, and not a true DMZ. None of the restrictions should cause you much concern if you have a 'typical' (geek) home network of a few internal hosts and a couple ports opened into internal machines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although it does n't sound like a SOHO solution , Cisco 's ASA5505 would be a good choice .
It will do up to 150 Mb/s of firewall throughput , or 100 Mb/s of VPN crypto .
If you have a small network , the model you want is ASA5505-BUN-K9 , which can be bought from many online retailers for under $ 400 .
If you are n't comfortable with Cisco 's CLI ( specifically PIX/ASA ) , the ASA line now also has a very good GUI which can be used to configure almost anything on the firewall .
It mangles object names and such for CLI junkies , but it works well if you always use the GUI.There are a few feature restrictions on the base-model 5505 , such as a maximum of 10 " inside " hosts getting to the Internet at any one time .
Also , while the 5505 base supports 3 VLANs , one of them is restricted and can only really be used as a " guest " segment , and not a true DMZ .
None of the restrictions should cause you much concern if you have a 'typical ' ( geek ) home network of a few internal hosts and a couple ports opened into internal machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although it doesn't sound like a SOHO solution, Cisco's ASA5505 would be a good choice.
It will do up to 150 Mb/s of firewall throughput, or 100 Mb/s of VPN crypto.
If you have a small network, the model you want is ASA5505-BUN-K9, which can be bought from many online retailers for under $400.
If you aren't comfortable with Cisco's CLI (specifically PIX/ASA), the ASA line now also has a very good GUI which can be used to configure almost anything on the firewall.
It mangles object names and such for CLI junkies, but it works well if you always use the GUI.There are a few feature restrictions on the base-model 5505, such as a maximum of 10 "inside" hosts getting to the Internet at any one time.
Also, while the 5505 base supports 3 VLANs, one of them is restricted and can only really be used as a "guest" segment, and not a true DMZ.
None of the restrictions should cause you much concern if you have a 'typical' (geek) home network of a few internal hosts and a couple ports opened into internal machines.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251786</id>
	<title>Mikrotik FTW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a bit concerned that so many slashdotters are using D-link, etc.<br>I thought everyone here, run iptables and built their own boxes...<br>anyhoo, as far as the OP's question goes, get yourself and old PC and run RouterOS on it or take a look at Mikrotik's Routerboard line of products.<br>Incredibly powerful feature sets (actually 90\%  of the functionality will be overkill for home use). These are Cisco killers for an eighth of the price (maybe even cheaper than that)<br>You will need to do what you are doing though as set up is not just point and shoot. There are some very good guides around though.</p><p>RouterOS: http://www.mikrotik.com/software.html<br>Mikrtik Routerboards: http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?started\_from\_home=1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a bit concerned that so many slashdotters are using D-link , etc.I thought everyone here , run iptables and built their own boxes...anyhoo , as far as the OP 's question goes , get yourself and old PC and run RouterOS on it or take a look at Mikrotik 's Routerboard line of products.Incredibly powerful feature sets ( actually 90 \ % of the functionality will be overkill for home use ) .
These are Cisco killers for an eighth of the price ( maybe even cheaper than that ) You will need to do what you are doing though as set up is not just point and shoot .
There are some very good guides around though.RouterOS : http : //www.mikrotik.com/software.htmlMikrtik Routerboards : http : //routerboard.com/pricelist.php ? started \ _from \ _home = 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a bit concerned that so many slashdotters are using D-link, etc.I thought everyone here, run iptables and built their own boxes...anyhoo, as far as the OP's question goes, get yourself and old PC and run RouterOS on it or take a look at Mikrotik's Routerboard line of products.Incredibly powerful feature sets (actually 90\%  of the functionality will be overkill for home use).
These are Cisco killers for an eighth of the price (maybe even cheaper than that)You will need to do what you are doing though as set up is not just point and shoot.
There are some very good guides around though.RouterOS: http://www.mikrotik.com/software.htmlMikrtik Routerboards: http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?started\_from\_home=1</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250924</id>
	<title>Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 or OpenBSD or...</title>
	<author>Merc248</author>
	<datestamp>1259327100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience, I've had great success with the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with Tomato in my house, and I've personally setup an OpenBSD box with pf for a coffee shop.  I don't have the connection at home to really saturate much of anything at the moment (I have a Comcast 22 Mbps connection myself), so I can't really comment on how well the router would scale up with a faster connection + NAT.  But OpenBSD + pf works extremely well with 20-30+ users all hitting up YouTube; before that, the coffee shop had a D-Link router which faltered within two hours of it being reset (by this time, it has to be power cycled again, ad nauseum.)</p><p>As other posters have said, be sure to get at least one 1 Gbps NIC card from Intel or 3Com.  I'd personally get two of them and leave the motherboard NIC untouched; I've found that a lot of the lower cost motherboards with low power CPU's usually only have a 10/100 Mbps port, which should be more than enough for most internet connections, but could possibly peter out in real world scenarios.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , I 've had great success with the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with Tomato in my house , and I 've personally setup an OpenBSD box with pf for a coffee shop .
I do n't have the connection at home to really saturate much of anything at the moment ( I have a Comcast 22 Mbps connection myself ) , so I ca n't really comment on how well the router would scale up with a faster connection + NAT .
But OpenBSD + pf works extremely well with 20-30 + users all hitting up YouTube ; before that , the coffee shop had a D-Link router which faltered within two hours of it being reset ( by this time , it has to be power cycled again , ad nauseum .
) As other posters have said , be sure to get at least one 1 Gbps NIC card from Intel or 3Com .
I 'd personally get two of them and leave the motherboard NIC untouched ; I 've found that a lot of the lower cost motherboards with low power CPU 's usually only have a 10/100 Mbps port , which should be more than enough for most internet connections , but could possibly peter out in real world scenarios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, I've had great success with the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with Tomato in my house, and I've personally setup an OpenBSD box with pf for a coffee shop.
I don't have the connection at home to really saturate much of anything at the moment (I have a Comcast 22 Mbps connection myself), so I can't really comment on how well the router would scale up with a faster connection + NAT.
But OpenBSD + pf works extremely well with 20-30+ users all hitting up YouTube; before that, the coffee shop had a D-Link router which faltered within two hours of it being reset (by this time, it has to be power cycled again, ad nauseum.
)As other posters have said, be sure to get at least one 1 Gbps NIC card from Intel or 3Com.
I'd personally get two of them and leave the motherboard NIC untouched; I've found that a lot of the lower cost motherboards with low power CPU's usually only have a 10/100 Mbps port, which should be more than enough for most internet connections, but could possibly peter out in real world scenarios.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253314</id>
	<title>FYI: WiFi WPA performance is limited</title>
	<author>UnderCoverPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1259402580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I recently discovered, the WPA performance is limited, so only wired and open WiFi will get full performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I recently discovered , the WPA performance is limited , so only wired and open WiFi will get full performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I recently discovered, the WPA performance is limited, so only wired and open WiFi will get full performance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30267456</id>
	<title>Re:Cisco</title>
	<author>RVley</author>
	<datestamp>1259524260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Saw some others suggesting this too. I think it's a great idea and I'll go for it. I also got my 100/100 connection last week and my Netgear FVS338 doesn't cut it. It gets to about 80mbit/s (24mbit IPSEC). Not like I'm using halve the connection, but it doesn't feel "right" not using the connection fully.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>Already using a ASA 5505 as a transparent firewall for my servers in the datacenter, works great. Will try to find a second hand, but if the price difference is not that big I'll just go for a new one. Great to have IOS at home and at least Cisco specifies performance right on their sites, not something I can say of the other manufacturers.</p><p>The only site that's a bit of help in the "el-cheapo homegateways" market is smallnetbuilder.com which tests and reviews these gateways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Saw some others suggesting this too .
I think it 's a great idea and I 'll go for it .
I also got my 100/100 connection last week and my Netgear FVS338 does n't cut it .
It gets to about 80mbit/s ( 24mbit IPSEC ) .
Not like I 'm using halve the connection , but it does n't feel " right " not using the connection fully .
: ) Already using a ASA 5505 as a transparent firewall for my servers in the datacenter , works great .
Will try to find a second hand , but if the price difference is not that big I 'll just go for a new one .
Great to have IOS at home and at least Cisco specifies performance right on their sites , not something I can say of the other manufacturers.The only site that 's a bit of help in the " el-cheapo homegateways " market is smallnetbuilder.com which tests and reviews these gateways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Saw some others suggesting this too.
I think it's a great idea and I'll go for it.
I also got my 100/100 connection last week and my Netgear FVS338 doesn't cut it.
It gets to about 80mbit/s (24mbit IPSEC).
Not like I'm using halve the connection, but it doesn't feel "right" not using the connection fully.
:)Already using a ASA 5505 as a transparent firewall for my servers in the datacenter, works great.
Will try to find a second hand, but if the price difference is not that big I'll just go for a new one.
Great to have IOS at home and at least Cisco specifies performance right on their sites, not something I can say of the other manufacturers.The only site that's a bit of help in the "el-cheapo homegateways" market is smallnetbuilder.com which tests and reviews these gateways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256080</id>
	<title>Re:I Beg To Differ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 50 mbps limit is probably due to the fastest xDSL being ADSL that has been tested<br>to 50mbps. Thus, if the home user can only get xDSL and afford SDSL and not ADSL, then<br>why go past 50mbps if the connection can't go faster. However, with FIOS go to higher<br>speeds, one needs some hardware faster than ADSL speeds now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 50 mbps limit is probably due to the fastest xDSL being ADSL that has been testedto 50mbps .
Thus , if the home user can only get xDSL and afford SDSL and not ADSL , thenwhy go past 50mbps if the connection ca n't go faster .
However , with FIOS go to higherspeeds , one needs some hardware faster than ADSL speeds now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 50 mbps limit is probably due to the fastest xDSL being ADSL that has been testedto 50mbps.
Thus, if the home user can only get xDSL and afford SDSL and not ADSL, thenwhy go past 50mbps if the connection can't go faster.
However, with FIOS go to higherspeeds, one needs some hardware faster than ADSL speeds now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250222</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>isama</author>
	<datestamp>1259323020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd simply set up a freebsd box (I'm learning bsd right now<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) ) or if you are more familliar with it use linux, I've been using an old celeron for about a year now, and it's an excelent router/firewall. Throw in a big disk and samba and you'll have a fileserver too! and a printserver. If you're non used to any *nix then I'd suggest to give it a try, I know it has made my life more fun!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) (that and getting a girlfriend<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd simply set up a freebsd box ( I 'm learning bsd right now : ) ) or if you are more familliar with it use linux , I 've been using an old celeron for about a year now , and it 's an excelent router/firewall .
Throw in a big disk and samba and you 'll have a fileserver too !
and a printserver .
If you 're non used to any * nix then I 'd suggest to give it a try , I know it has made my life more fun !
: ) ( that and getting a girlfriend : P )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd simply set up a freebsd box (I'm learning bsd right now :) ) or if you are more familliar with it use linux, I've been using an old celeron for about a year now, and it's an excelent router/firewall.
Throw in a big disk and samba and you'll have a fileserver too!
and a printserver.
If you're non used to any *nix then I'd suggest to give it a try, I know it has made my life more fun!
:) (that and getting a girlfriend :P)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250948</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>BandoMcHando</author>
	<datestamp>1259327280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I do like the whole WRT54GL thing, you do appear to be answering a different question to the one that was asked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do like the whole WRT54GL thing , you do appear to be answering a different question to the one that was asked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I do like the whole WRT54GL thing, you do appear to be answering a different question to the one that was asked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249028</id>
	<title>Re:Linux PC</title>
	<author>tlhIngan</author>
	<datestamp>1259316840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.</p></div></blockquote><p>True, but there's <a href="http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/index.php?option=com\_chart&amp;Itemid=&amp;chart=119" title="smallnetbuilder.com">a number of routers</a> [smallnetbuilder.com] that do have pretty impressive performance - I think the ones pushing 200+Mbps are lying during the test, but a number of not-so-cheap home routers do perfectly fine. (These aren't the $20 specials, but they're half decent, and most are under $200 on sale).</p><p>You won't be doing NAT at GigE speeds - you can try, but there'll be bottlenecks in any system before you hit GigE. But a decent home router can be acquired that will handle the load easily.</p><p>The only real issue is the router's (or Linux?) limit of 4096 connections, which may be easily saturated if you do a lot of torrenting. (Especially UDP connections - nothing keels over a router faster than having UDP sessions clog up the NAT tables). But these routers often have decent processors and decent amounts of RAM, and many on the top run Linux.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The replies you 've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds , which of course you 've already figured out is nonsense.True , but there 's a number of routers [ smallnetbuilder.com ] that do have pretty impressive performance - I think the ones pushing 200 + Mbps are lying during the test , but a number of not-so-cheap home routers do perfectly fine .
( These are n't the $ 20 specials , but they 're half decent , and most are under $ 200 on sale ) .You wo n't be doing NAT at GigE speeds - you can try , but there 'll be bottlenecks in any system before you hit GigE .
But a decent home router can be acquired that will handle the load easily.The only real issue is the router 's ( or Linux ?
) limit of 4096 connections , which may be easily saturated if you do a lot of torrenting .
( Especially UDP connections - nothing keels over a router faster than having UDP sessions clog up the NAT tables ) .
But these routers often have decent processors and decent amounts of RAM , and many on the top run Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.True, but there's a number of routers [smallnetbuilder.com] that do have pretty impressive performance - I think the ones pushing 200+Mbps are lying during the test, but a number of not-so-cheap home routers do perfectly fine.
(These aren't the $20 specials, but they're half decent, and most are under $200 on sale).You won't be doing NAT at GigE speeds - you can try, but there'll be bottlenecks in any system before you hit GigE.
But a decent home router can be acquired that will handle the load easily.The only real issue is the router's (or Linux?
) limit of 4096 connections, which may be easily saturated if you do a lot of torrenting.
(Especially UDP connections - nothing keels over a router faster than having UDP sessions clog up the NAT tables).
But these routers often have decent processors and decent amounts of RAM, and many on the top run Linux.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248868</id>
	<title>Pick anything</title>
	<author>Zedrick</author>
	<datestamp>1259316180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anything should do. I guess your d-link is a few years years old? I worked for D-link support (yes, yuck) around 5 years ago when people started getting 100/100 at home, and we got plenty of complaints about specifications vs reality. But that wasn't a problem with the "new" models back then, and I can't imagine any home router for sale now that can't handle 100Mb with NATing and Firewalling etc.<br> <br>

Don't worry about speed, look at the price, support (do you have to a broken unit to china or can you get it replaced in the store?) and features instead.
<br> <br>
Or even better: bring up an old computer with two NICs from the basement, install Linux or FreeBSD and add a cheap switch. That beats any home router in price and features!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything should do .
I guess your d-link is a few years years old ?
I worked for D-link support ( yes , yuck ) around 5 years ago when people started getting 100/100 at home , and we got plenty of complaints about specifications vs reality .
But that was n't a problem with the " new " models back then , and I ca n't imagine any home router for sale now that ca n't handle 100Mb with NATing and Firewalling etc .
Do n't worry about speed , look at the price , support ( do you have to a broken unit to china or can you get it replaced in the store ?
) and features instead .
Or even better : bring up an old computer with two NICs from the basement , install Linux or FreeBSD and add a cheap switch .
That beats any home router in price and features !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything should do.
I guess your d-link is a few years years old?
I worked for D-link support (yes, yuck) around 5 years ago when people started getting 100/100 at home, and we got plenty of complaints about specifications vs reality.
But that wasn't a problem with the "new" models back then, and I can't imagine any home router for sale now that can't handle 100Mb with NATing and Firewalling etc.
Don't worry about speed, look at the price, support (do you have to a broken unit to china or can you get it replaced in the store?
) and features instead.
Or even better: bring up an old computer with two NICs from the basement, install Linux or FreeBSD and add a cheap switch.
That beats any home router in price and features!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256260</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259441280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Completely false.  I don't have a stellar connection (12 mbps or so) but I've maxed it torrenting for hours at a time on a WRT54gl, both with tomato and ddwrt.  Dunno what you're doing differently, but it works fine for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Completely false .
I do n't have a stellar connection ( 12 mbps or so ) but I 've maxed it torrenting for hours at a time on a WRT54gl , both with tomato and ddwrt .
Dunno what you 're doing differently , but it works fine for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Completely false.
I don't have a stellar connection (12 mbps or so) but I've maxed it torrenting for hours at a time on a WRT54gl, both with tomato and ddwrt.
Dunno what you're doing differently, but it works fine for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249198</id>
	<title>IPC board + PFsense</title>
	<author>xianthax</author>
	<datestamp>1259317860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i use a jetway NC92 series IPC board, its got a dual core atom processor and 1GB of ram.  Use a small CF card for a hard drive with an IDE adaptor.  You can get a very small case for such a board with an external laptop style power supply, it draws very little power anyway.</p><p>I also grabbed the 3 gigabit port riser card jetway offers for this board, giving me 4 gigabit NICs on board.</p><p>For software i use PFsense, the 4 interfaces are set up as WAN,LAN,Wifi and DMZ.  Pfsense also handles several other tasks such as openVPN.</p><p>At the end of the day i found no other solution for $250 that could provide 20mbit/sec throughput with all these features.  The setup has been running without reboot for around 8 months now, couldn't be happier and the web interface is very easy to use and very easy to add plug ins to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i use a jetway NC92 series IPC board , its got a dual core atom processor and 1GB of ram .
Use a small CF card for a hard drive with an IDE adaptor .
You can get a very small case for such a board with an external laptop style power supply , it draws very little power anyway.I also grabbed the 3 gigabit port riser card jetway offers for this board , giving me 4 gigabit NICs on board.For software i use PFsense , the 4 interfaces are set up as WAN,LAN,Wifi and DMZ .
Pfsense also handles several other tasks such as openVPN.At the end of the day i found no other solution for $ 250 that could provide 20mbit/sec throughput with all these features .
The setup has been running without reboot for around 8 months now , could n't be happier and the web interface is very easy to use and very easy to add plug ins to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i use a jetway NC92 series IPC board, its got a dual core atom processor and 1GB of ram.
Use a small CF card for a hard drive with an IDE adaptor.
You can get a very small case for such a board with an external laptop style power supply, it draws very little power anyway.I also grabbed the 3 gigabit port riser card jetway offers for this board, giving me 4 gigabit NICs on board.For software i use PFsense, the 4 interfaces are set up as WAN,LAN,Wifi and DMZ.
Pfsense also handles several other tasks such as openVPN.At the end of the day i found no other solution for $250 that could provide 20mbit/sec throughput with all these features.
The setup has been running without reboot for around 8 months now, couldn't be happier and the web interface is very easy to use and very easy to add plug ins to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248932</id>
	<title>Mikrotik</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mikrotik Routers, despite some bad press, are good. They are inexpensive, can be build with commodity hardware, and easily handle that level of traffic.</p><p>hardware specs on mine: 2.4Ghz P-IV, 512MB Rambus RAM, 1 * T100 Ethernet port (motherboard)connected to modem, 5 * 10/100/1000 ports (NICs) connected to home network and one 802.11g wifi NIC (operating as a hotspot), 1 256MB flash card in IDE adapter.</p><p>FIOS connection gives me 60*5 with one IP, and regularly sustains that with as many as four separate machines running BT at any given time, 2 public game servers, as well as various other uses. 60+ firewall rules, full NAT with 20+ port forwarding rules, it runs like a champ.</p><p><a href="http://www.mikrotik.com/" title="mikrotik.com">http://www.mikrotik.com/</a> [mikrotik.com]</p><p>If you already have the hardware laying around doing nothing, go ahead and give them a look.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mikrotik Routers , despite some bad press , are good .
They are inexpensive , can be build with commodity hardware , and easily handle that level of traffic.hardware specs on mine : 2.4Ghz P-IV , 512MB Rambus RAM , 1 * T100 Ethernet port ( motherboard ) connected to modem , 5 * 10/100/1000 ports ( NICs ) connected to home network and one 802.11g wifi NIC ( operating as a hotspot ) , 1 256MB flash card in IDE adapter.FIOS connection gives me 60 * 5 with one IP , and regularly sustains that with as many as four separate machines running BT at any given time , 2 public game servers , as well as various other uses .
60 + firewall rules , full NAT with 20 + port forwarding rules , it runs like a champ.http : //www.mikrotik.com/ [ mikrotik.com ] If you already have the hardware laying around doing nothing , go ahead and give them a look .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mikrotik Routers, despite some bad press, are good.
They are inexpensive, can be build with commodity hardware, and easily handle that level of traffic.hardware specs on mine: 2.4Ghz P-IV, 512MB Rambus RAM, 1 * T100 Ethernet port (motherboard)connected to modem, 5 * 10/100/1000 ports (NICs) connected to home network and one 802.11g wifi NIC (operating as a hotspot), 1 256MB flash card in IDE adapter.FIOS connection gives me 60*5 with one IP, and regularly sustains that with as many as four separate machines running BT at any given time, 2 public game servers, as well as various other uses.
60+ firewall rules, full NAT with 20+ port forwarding rules, it runs like a champ.http://www.mikrotik.com/ [mikrotik.com]If you already have the hardware laying around doing nothing, go ahead and give them a look.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249114</id>
	<title>Actiontec Mi424WR</title>
	<author>soulsteal</author>
	<datestamp>1259317320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.actiontec.com/products/product.php?pid=189" title="actiontec.com">http://www.actiontec.com/products/product.php?pid=189</a> [actiontec.com]</p><p>This may be what you're looking for. Offers 10/100 WAN ethernet interface, NAT, the whole she-bang.</p><p>You can find them used on eBay for under $40 shipped. I personally used a pair to utilize a coax line in my office for hard-wiring my desktop as my wireless was being spotty. Through put is better than 802.11g and ping times are in the 3ms range.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.actiontec.com/products/product.php ? pid = 189 [ actiontec.com ] This may be what you 're looking for .
Offers 10/100 WAN ethernet interface , NAT , the whole she-bang.You can find them used on eBay for under $ 40 shipped .
I personally used a pair to utilize a coax line in my office for hard-wiring my desktop as my wireless was being spotty .
Through put is better than 802.11g and ping times are in the 3ms range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.actiontec.com/products/product.php?pid=189 [actiontec.com]This may be what you're looking for.
Offers 10/100 WAN ethernet interface, NAT, the whole she-bang.You can find them used on eBay for under $40 shipped.
I personally used a pair to utilize a coax line in my office for hard-wiring my desktop as my wireless was being spotty.
Through put is better than 802.11g and ping times are in the 3ms range.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30254658</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1259425320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just an FYI, any used Cisco 2600 series router can match those speeds, and you can get them dirt cheap off of ebay or whatever.. We were worried when we went from T1 speeds to 100/100 at work, and just used the second ethernet port in the router, (it came with 2) and it worked like a champ.  Granted, I did pull some of the ACL stuff and NAT out of that router, so it could handle those speeds a little better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just an FYI , any used Cisco 2600 series router can match those speeds , and you can get them dirt cheap off of ebay or whatever.. We were worried when we went from T1 speeds to 100/100 at work , and just used the second ethernet port in the router , ( it came with 2 ) and it worked like a champ .
Granted , I did pull some of the ACL stuff and NAT out of that router , so it could handle those speeds a little better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just an FYI, any used Cisco 2600 series router can match those speeds, and you can get them dirt cheap off of ebay or whatever.. We were worried when we went from T1 speeds to 100/100 at work, and just used the second ethernet port in the router, (it came with 2) and it worked like a champ.
Granted, I did pull some of the ACL stuff and NAT out of that router, so it could handle those speeds a little better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251658</id>
	<title>Posted router performance test results</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259332740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com \ _chart/Itemid,189/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248878</id>
	<title>RB750(G)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take a look at the Routerboard <a href="http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=56" title="routerboard.com" rel="nofollow">750</a> [routerboard.com] and <a href="http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=90" title="routerboard.com" rel="nofollow">750G</a> [routerboard.com], they're great routers and once you see the flexibility of configuration you won't want to go back to off the shelf routers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at the Routerboard 750 [ routerboard.com ] and 750G [ routerboard.com ] , they 're great routers and once you see the flexibility of configuration you wo n't want to go back to off the shelf routers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at the Routerboard 750 [routerboard.com] and 750G [routerboard.com], they're great routers and once you see the flexibility of configuration you won't want to go back to off the shelf routers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774</id>
	<title>WRT-160NL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259315700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 100/10 mbit (fiber, no modems etc) line at home and use a Linksys WRT-160NL. When I do heavy file transfer (downloading, mainly from big FTPs like universities and such) the speed is around 90 mbits (~9.5 Mb/sec).<br>I highly recommend it. And if you're extra geeky, I know that there's a OpenWRT port being worked on, but it's not finished yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 100/10 mbit ( fiber , no modems etc ) line at home and use a Linksys WRT-160NL .
When I do heavy file transfer ( downloading , mainly from big FTPs like universities and such ) the speed is around 90 mbits ( ~ 9.5 Mb/sec ) .I highly recommend it .
And if you 're extra geeky , I know that there 's a OpenWRT port being worked on , but it 's not finished yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 100/10 mbit (fiber, no modems etc) line at home and use a Linksys WRT-160NL.
When I do heavy file transfer (downloading, mainly from big FTPs like universities and such) the speed is around 90 mbits (~9.5 Mb/sec).I highly recommend it.
And if you're extra geeky, I know that there's a OpenWRT port being worked on, but it's not finished yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259315640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you actually run one that fast?  And not just routing over your internal network, but routing over the Internet at 30+ Mbps.</p><p>Running across the NAT firewall at those speeds is difficult even on a fast server.. These little WRT's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU's.</p><p>As for the OP, what cable service do you have?  I'm guessing not in the US?  100 Mbps might be common in Japan or something but in the US that's like holy shiat speed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you actually run one that fast ?
And not just routing over your internal network , but routing over the Internet at 30 + Mbps.Running across the NAT firewall at those speeds is difficult even on a fast server.. These little WRT 's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU 's.As for the OP , what cable service do you have ?
I 'm guessing not in the US ?
100 Mbps might be common in Japan or something but in the US that 's like holy shiat speed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you actually run one that fast?
And not just routing over your internal network, but routing over the Internet at 30+ Mbps.Running across the NAT firewall at those speeds is difficult even on a fast server.. These little WRT's and such have the equivalent of 8-bit 200 Mhz CPU's.As for the OP, what cable service do you have?
I'm guessing not in the US?
100 Mbps might be common in Japan or something but in the US that's like holy shiat speed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249270</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>twokay</author>
	<datestamp>1259318220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yup +1 for pfSense it really is great. Run it on an embedded ALIX board like this <a href="http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12270" title="linitx.com" rel="nofollow">http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12270</a> [linitx.com] and for &pound;100 (plus ~30 for compact flash and enclosure) you have firewall/router that would cost... well far more than &pound;100 from Cisco or any other name-brand lock-in. I'm pretty sure an embedded chipset like the ALIX (500mhz AMD Geode) will do 100mbit full duplex without problems.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup + 1 for pfSense it really is great .
Run it on an embedded ALIX board like this http : //linitx.com/viewproduct.php ? prodid = 12270 [ linitx.com ] and for   100 ( plus ~ 30 for compact flash and enclosure ) you have firewall/router that would cost... well far more than   100 from Cisco or any other name-brand lock-in .
I 'm pretty sure an embedded chipset like the ALIX ( 500mhz AMD Geode ) will do 100mbit full duplex without problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup +1 for pfSense it really is great.
Run it on an embedded ALIX board like this http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12270 [linitx.com] and for £100 (plus ~30 for compact flash and enclosure) you have firewall/router that would cost... well far more than £100 from Cisco or any other name-brand lock-in.
I'm pretty sure an embedded chipset like the ALIX (500mhz AMD Geode) will do 100mbit full duplex without problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249636</id>
	<title>NetGear RangeMax WNDR3700</title>
	<author>j\_sp\_r</author>
	<datestamp>1259319960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm looking at the NetGear RangeMax WNDR3700 Dual Band Wireless-N Gigabit Router. Haven't tested it yet and like to know how it performs. I got 50mbits at home as well, going up to 80mbits this year and I want Wireless-N at high speeds (2 meters distance, ethernet ports WILL break if you plug it in daily).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm looking at the NetGear RangeMax WNDR3700 Dual Band Wireless-N Gigabit Router .
Have n't tested it yet and like to know how it performs .
I got 50mbits at home as well , going up to 80mbits this year and I want Wireless-N at high speeds ( 2 meters distance , ethernet ports WILL break if you plug it in daily ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm looking at the NetGear RangeMax WNDR3700 Dual Band Wireless-N Gigabit Router.
Haven't tested it yet and like to know how it performs.
I got 50mbits at home as well, going up to 80mbits this year and I want Wireless-N at high speeds (2 meters distance, ethernet ports WILL break if you plug it in daily).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30274996</id>
	<title>100mbit connection?</title>
	<author>Hypoon</author>
	<datestamp>1259576880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where do I need to relocate to in order to get a 100mbit residential connection? As far as I'm aware, the only things "widespread" in the US is Verizon and Comcast, and they only go up to 50 mbit it seems. I know Japan's got it all over the place, I'm curious where you guys are getting it from.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do I need to relocate to in order to get a 100mbit residential connection ?
As far as I 'm aware , the only things " widespread " in the US is Verizon and Comcast , and they only go up to 50 mbit it seems .
I know Japan 's got it all over the place , I 'm curious where you guys are getting it from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do I need to relocate to in order to get a 100mbit residential connection?
As far as I'm aware, the only things "widespread" in the US is Verizon and Comcast, and they only go up to 50 mbit it seems.
I know Japan's got it all over the place, I'm curious where you guys are getting it from.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249738</id>
	<title>Easy:  Hacom box w/ pfSense</title>
	<author>darkpixel2k</author>
	<datestamp>1259320620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go buy the cheapest 1U Hacom box <a href="http://www.hacom.net/catalog/systems/1u-server" title="hacom.net">here</a> [hacom.net] <br>
It's even cheaper if you get the box bare-bones and get the memory, CF card, etc... from newegg.<br>
Then go load <a href="http://pfsense.com/" title="pfsense.com">pfSense</a> [pfsense.com] on the flash card and turn it on.<br>
<br>
The setup is easy and you get more of a commercial-grade firewall than a home firewall.  It'll handle gigabit speed easily.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go buy the cheapest 1U Hacom box here [ hacom.net ] It 's even cheaper if you get the box bare-bones and get the memory , CF card , etc... from newegg .
Then go load pfSense [ pfsense.com ] on the flash card and turn it on .
The setup is easy and you get more of a commercial-grade firewall than a home firewall .
It 'll handle gigabit speed easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go buy the cheapest 1U Hacom box here [hacom.net] 
It's even cheaper if you get the box bare-bones and get the memory, CF card, etc... from newegg.
Then go load pfSense [pfsense.com] on the flash card and turn it on.
The setup is easy and you get more of a commercial-grade firewall than a home firewall.
It'll handle gigabit speed easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250228</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1259323080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except the WRT54GL can't handle torrents, doesn't matter if it's Tomato, DD-WRT, OpenWRT, or the stock firmware. And handling of wireless signals isn't too great.</p><p>Running one right now with DD-WRT to act as a wireless repeater bridge to post to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except the WRT54GL ca n't handle torrents , does n't matter if it 's Tomato , DD-WRT , OpenWRT , or the stock firmware .
And handling of wireless signals is n't too great.Running one right now with DD-WRT to act as a wireless repeater bridge to post to / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except the WRT54GL can't handle torrents, doesn't matter if it's Tomato, DD-WRT, OpenWRT, or the stock firmware.
And handling of wireless signals isn't too great.Running one right now with DD-WRT to act as a wireless repeater bridge to post to /.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248974</id>
	<title>Asus RT-N16</title>
	<author>bu1137</author>
	<datestamp>1259316660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Asus RT-N16 should be up to this task, as it has a rather unusually powerfull cpu on board.
<br>
<a href="http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P\_ID=WAa6AQFncrceRBEo&amp;templete=2" title="asus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P\_ID=WAa6AQFncrceRBEo&amp;templete=2</a> [asus.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Asus RT-N16 should be up to this task , as it has a rather unusually powerfull cpu on board .
http : //www.asus.com/product.aspx ? P \ _ID = WAa6AQFncrceRBEo&amp;templete = 2 [ asus.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Asus RT-N16 should be up to this task, as it has a rather unusually powerfull cpu on board.
http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P\_ID=WAa6AQFncrceRBEo&amp;templete=2 [asus.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249414</id>
	<title>Choose one from the list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would recommend that you check out the list on the following website:</p><p>http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/</p><p>The list is a WAN to LAN throughput list, where you can see how much WAN to LAN throughput the different routers can handle. Personally I ended up buying a DIR-655 (fastest available 2 years ago when I bought it). Its a very fast router, that enables full 100/100 speeds on my internet connect where I peak at around 11mb/s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would recommend that you check out the list on the following website : http : //www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com \ _chart/Itemid,189/The list is a WAN to LAN throughput list , where you can see how much WAN to LAN throughput the different routers can handle .
Personally I ended up buying a DIR-655 ( fastest available 2 years ago when I bought it ) .
Its a very fast router , that enables full 100/100 speeds on my internet connect where I peak at around 11mb/s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would recommend that you check out the list on the following website:http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com\_chart/Itemid,189/The list is a WAN to LAN throughput list, where you can see how much WAN to LAN throughput the different routers can handle.
Personally I ended up buying a DIR-655 (fastest available 2 years ago when I bought it).
Its a very fast router, that enables full 100/100 speeds on my internet connect where I peak at around 11mb/s.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249400</id>
	<title>Re:Linux PC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.tomsguide.com/us/review-smoothwall,review-353-6.html</p><p>Old info but.............. "With the "endpoint" running Windows 2000 Pro and the "test" system running Windows XP Home, using the QCheck utility, I measured TCP throughput at 93.023 Mbps using 1000kByte data size and I measured UDP throughput at 27.778 Mbps using 1000kByte data size. With "endpoint" and "test" both running Mandrake Linux 10.1 Official, using the IPerf utility, I measured TCP throughput at 93.6 Mbps using a 16kByte TCP window size. As I've mentioned in earlier articles, the practical limits of 100Base-TX Ethernet are generally considered to be somewhere between 60 and 95 percent of the 100Mbps theoretical limit, so these results are definitely towards the high end. What this means is that the limiting factor here, at least when it comes to raw network throughput, is definitely not the software."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.tomsguide.com/us/review-smoothwall,review-353-6.htmlOld info but.............. " With the " endpoint " running Windows 2000 Pro and the " test " system running Windows XP Home , using the QCheck utility , I measured TCP throughput at 93.023 Mbps using 1000kByte data size and I measured UDP throughput at 27.778 Mbps using 1000kByte data size .
With " endpoint " and " test " both running Mandrake Linux 10.1 Official , using the IPerf utility , I measured TCP throughput at 93.6 Mbps using a 16kByte TCP window size .
As I 've mentioned in earlier articles , the practical limits of 100Base-TX Ethernet are generally considered to be somewhere between 60 and 95 percent of the 100Mbps theoretical limit , so these results are definitely towards the high end .
What this means is that the limiting factor here , at least when it comes to raw network throughput , is definitely not the software .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.tomsguide.com/us/review-smoothwall,review-353-6.htmlOld info but.............. "With the "endpoint" running Windows 2000 Pro and the "test" system running Windows XP Home, using the QCheck utility, I measured TCP throughput at 93.023 Mbps using 1000kByte data size and I measured UDP throughput at 27.778 Mbps using 1000kByte data size.
With "endpoint" and "test" both running Mandrake Linux 10.1 Official, using the IPerf utility, I measured TCP throughput at 93.6 Mbps using a 16kByte TCP window size.
As I've mentioned in earlier articles, the practical limits of 100Base-TX Ethernet are generally considered to be somewhere between 60 and 95 percent of the 100Mbps theoretical limit, so these results are definitely towards the high end.
What this means is that the limiting factor here, at least when it comes to raw network throughput, is definitely not the software.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249894</id>
	<title>Re:Mikrotik</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A 2.4GHz P4? Have you ever calculated how much per year you're paying to power that sucker? You could buy a great Cisco router that'd probably be cheaper overall if you kept it for more than a year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A 2.4GHz P4 ?
Have you ever calculated how much per year you 're paying to power that sucker ?
You could buy a great Cisco router that 'd probably be cheaper overall if you kept it for more than a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 2.4GHz P4?
Have you ever calculated how much per year you're paying to power that sucker?
You could buy a great Cisco router that'd probably be cheaper overall if you kept it for more than a year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248932</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249334</id>
	<title>Re:You must be new here.</title>
	<author>realityimpaired</author>
	<datestamp>1259318520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*shrugs* it's easier and cheaper to just buy an off-the-shelf router/nat box, and for most of us, we'll never see the performance drop. I've got a pretty decent Belkin unit that has no issues at all sharing/managing my 25mbit cable connection.</p><p>I *have* built my own router using Linux in the past. It's just not worth the headache when commodity hardware is cheaper and will do the job adequately. Besides, I only have one playbox at my disposal right now, and I use it for other purposes. Namely, it's a small home fileserver, serving up movies/mp3's to my HTPCs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* shrugs * it 's easier and cheaper to just buy an off-the-shelf router/nat box , and for most of us , we 'll never see the performance drop .
I 've got a pretty decent Belkin unit that has no issues at all sharing/managing my 25mbit cable connection.I * have * built my own router using Linux in the past .
It 's just not worth the headache when commodity hardware is cheaper and will do the job adequately .
Besides , I only have one playbox at my disposal right now , and I use it for other purposes .
Namely , it 's a small home fileserver , serving up movies/mp3 's to my HTPCs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*shrugs* it's easier and cheaper to just buy an off-the-shelf router/nat box, and for most of us, we'll never see the performance drop.
I've got a pretty decent Belkin unit that has no issues at all sharing/managing my 25mbit cable connection.I *have* built my own router using Linux in the past.
It's just not worth the headache when commodity hardware is cheaper and will do the job adequately.
Besides, I only have one playbox at my disposal right now, and I use it for other purposes.
Namely, it's a small home fileserver, serving up movies/mp3's to my HTPCs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252066</id>
	<title>re home hs router</title>
	<author>freddieb</author>
	<datestamp>1259337720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use FeeBSD 8 as a router and also have a Slackware box configured. Both work equally well. My old netgear router
only handled 12mb and my cable can hit 35mb/s. Either linux or freebsd or openbsd for that matter make a great router
os. If you look around a bit you will find all kinds of howto's on the net. You can also make the box a samba shared drive and
a print server if you are up to it.

All you have to do is put fwo ethenet cards in medium power system (almost anything with work cpu wise 512m ram will also
work fine), install your flavor of linux, enable ipforwarding, iptables, and setup your routing. You will be amazed at the speed
increase.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use FeeBSD 8 as a router and also have a Slackware box configured .
Both work equally well .
My old netgear router only handled 12mb and my cable can hit 35mb/s .
Either linux or freebsd or openbsd for that matter make a great router os .
If you look around a bit you will find all kinds of howto 's on the net .
You can also make the box a samba shared drive and a print server if you are up to it .
All you have to do is put fwo ethenet cards in medium power system ( almost anything with work cpu wise 512m ram will also work fine ) , install your flavor of linux , enable ipforwarding , iptables , and setup your routing .
You will be amazed at the speed increase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use FeeBSD 8 as a router and also have a Slackware box configured.
Both work equally well.
My old netgear router
only handled 12mb and my cable can hit 35mb/s.
Either linux or freebsd or openbsd for that matter make a great router
os.
If you look around a bit you will find all kinds of howto's on the net.
You can also make the box a samba shared drive and
a print server if you are up to it.
All you have to do is put fwo ethenet cards in medium power system (almost anything with work cpu wise 512m ram will also
work fine), install your flavor of linux, enable ipforwarding, iptables, and setup your routing.
You will be amazed at the speed
increase.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253156</id>
	<title>Build a router...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259398800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get this: http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=8189-P3U-LNX-1R&amp;cat=SYS</p><p>Add a few extra GB NIC cards and install IPCOP or M0n0wall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get this : http : //www.geeks.com/details.asp ? invtid = 8189-P3U-LNX-1R&amp;cat = SYSAdd a few extra GB NIC cards and install IPCOP or M0n0wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get this: http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=8189-P3U-LNX-1R&amp;cat=SYSAdd a few extra GB NIC cards and install IPCOP or M0n0wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249928</id>
	<title>Re:You must be new here.</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1259321400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to...  then one day I realize my time was worth more.  So, unless I'm tapped for money I'll just buy an off the shelf solution.  I have a linksys in my home office, running *gasp* linksys firmware.  I don't have the problem the original poster does, because I'm limited to 1.5Mb right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to... then one day I realize my time was worth more .
So , unless I 'm tapped for money I 'll just buy an off the shelf solution .
I have a linksys in my home office , running * gasp * linksys firmware .
I do n't have the problem the original poster does , because I 'm limited to 1.5Mb right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to...  then one day I realize my time was worth more.
So, unless I'm tapped for money I'll just buy an off the shelf solution.
I have a linksys in my home office, running *gasp* linksys firmware.
I don't have the problem the original poster does, because I'm limited to 1.5Mb right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30254600</id>
	<title>That one is easy</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1259424660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get an Alix or a RouterBOARD. You will love it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get an Alix or a RouterBOARD .
You will love it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get an Alix or a RouterBOARD.
You will love it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248938</id>
	<title>WRAPs or similar are nice.</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1259316480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pretty much any home router in a box that you can buy is going to be rubbish. To be fair, it is pretty impressive what you can get for $30-$50; but intense price sensitivity and competition have pretty much leveled the home router field. You can either get the (impressive for the money; but not good enough) basic model, or you can go cry.<br> <br>

The Ciscos and Junipers of the world will probably cut it(with the distinctly possible exception of older used ones. If you get something from the era where routing a 10Mb lan into a T1 line was Real Serious Stuff, bittorrent over a 30Mb line is going to make it cry expensive enterprise tears); but they are expensive, even used, and many of their features are probably overkill for home applications.<br> <br>

Your best bet might be to run <a href="http://m0n0.ch/wall/" title="m0n0.ch">m0n0wall</a> [m0n0.ch] or <a href="http://www.pfsense.com/" title="pfsense.com">pfsense</a> [pfsense.com]. Depending on your tolerance for fan noise, you can either get a basic intel atom board for ~$80 or an embedded x86 board from <a href="http://www.soekris.com/" title="soekris.com">soekris</a> [soekris.com] or <a href="http://www.pcengines.ch/" title="pcengines.ch">pcengines</a> [pcengines.ch] or similar.<br> <br>

That combination will be pretty featureful, quite a bit more powerful than your basic home box, and cheaper than any business box that isn't seriously antiquated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much any home router in a box that you can buy is going to be rubbish .
To be fair , it is pretty impressive what you can get for $ 30- $ 50 ; but intense price sensitivity and competition have pretty much leveled the home router field .
You can either get the ( impressive for the money ; but not good enough ) basic model , or you can go cry .
The Ciscos and Junipers of the world will probably cut it ( with the distinctly possible exception of older used ones .
If you get something from the era where routing a 10Mb lan into a T1 line was Real Serious Stuff , bittorrent over a 30Mb line is going to make it cry expensive enterprise tears ) ; but they are expensive , even used , and many of their features are probably overkill for home applications .
Your best bet might be to run m0n0wall [ m0n0.ch ] or pfsense [ pfsense.com ] .
Depending on your tolerance for fan noise , you can either get a basic intel atom board for ~ $ 80 or an embedded x86 board from soekris [ soekris.com ] or pcengines [ pcengines.ch ] or similar .
That combination will be pretty featureful , quite a bit more powerful than your basic home box , and cheaper than any business box that is n't seriously antiquated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much any home router in a box that you can buy is going to be rubbish.
To be fair, it is pretty impressive what you can get for $30-$50; but intense price sensitivity and competition have pretty much leveled the home router field.
You can either get the (impressive for the money; but not good enough) basic model, or you can go cry.
The Ciscos and Junipers of the world will probably cut it(with the distinctly possible exception of older used ones.
If you get something from the era where routing a 10Mb lan into a T1 line was Real Serious Stuff, bittorrent over a 30Mb line is going to make it cry expensive enterprise tears); but they are expensive, even used, and many of their features are probably overkill for home applications.
Your best bet might be to run m0n0wall [m0n0.ch] or pfsense [pfsense.com].
Depending on your tolerance for fan noise, you can either get a basic intel atom board for ~$80 or an embedded x86 board from soekris [soekris.com] or pcengines [pcengines.ch] or similar.
That combination will be pretty featureful, quite a bit more powerful than your basic home box, and cheaper than any business box that isn't seriously antiquated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248924</id>
	<title>logic supply has good low power machines for this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought a little router from these guys:<br>http://www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall\_systems</p><p>I've been happy with it so far, though I regret getting one with fans in it.  Can be noisy during summer.</p><p>It's louder than my mac mini.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a little router from these guys : http : //www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall \ _systemsI 've been happy with it so far , though I regret getting one with fans in it .
Can be noisy during summer.It 's louder than my mac mini .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a little router from these guys:http://www.logicsupply.com/categories/firewall\_systemsI've been happy with it so far, though I regret getting one with fans in it.
Can be noisy during summer.It's louder than my mac mini.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252704</id>
	<title>Ah yes, use old hardware and $500 on electricity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259347080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What most dont appreciate is that a common $50-60 router would do everything the OP wants, and use low double digit watts while running, while "your old computer and some open source s/w" approach wastes more than that in power supply inefficiency.</p><p>While a 6 year old computer gives you fabulous flexibility, as usual the total costs and support limitations are lost on the typical slashdot poster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What most dont appreciate is that a common $ 50-60 router would do everything the OP wants , and use low double digit watts while running , while " your old computer and some open source s/w " approach wastes more than that in power supply inefficiency.While a 6 year old computer gives you fabulous flexibility , as usual the total costs and support limitations are lost on the typical slashdot poster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What most dont appreciate is that a common $50-60 router would do everything the OP wants, and use low double digit watts while running, while "your old computer and some open source s/w" approach wastes more than that in power supply inefficiency.While a 6 year old computer gives you fabulous flexibility, as usual the total costs and support limitations are lost on the typical slashdot poster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256206</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>magamiako1</author>
	<datestamp>1259440500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your $1,000 router/firewall couldn't handle NAT speeds of 100Mbit?<br><br>I find that hard to believe--unless you paid $1,000 15 years ago for it.<br><br>A Juniper SSG5 could handle this without much of a problem. You could also pick up a Sonicwall TZ200 or TZ210 series.<br><br>While arguably more expensive up front than your average pfsense configuration, the legitimate devices are ultimately the best solution since they also provide extra services such as AV scanning, etc.<br><br>Oh, and the flip side is these devices operate on much more stable hardware with much lower power envelopes than a completely wasteful pfsense machine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your $ 1,000 router/firewall could n't handle NAT speeds of 100Mbit ? I find that hard to believe--unless you paid $ 1,000 15 years ago for it.A Juniper SSG5 could handle this without much of a problem .
You could also pick up a Sonicwall TZ200 or TZ210 series.While arguably more expensive up front than your average pfsense configuration , the legitimate devices are ultimately the best solution since they also provide extra services such as AV scanning , etc.Oh , and the flip side is these devices operate on much more stable hardware with much lower power envelopes than a completely wasteful pfsense machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your $1,000 router/firewall couldn't handle NAT speeds of 100Mbit?I find that hard to believe--unless you paid $1,000 15 years ago for it.A Juniper SSG5 could handle this without much of a problem.
You could also pick up a Sonicwall TZ200 or TZ210 series.While arguably more expensive up front than your average pfsense configuration, the legitimate devices are ultimately the best solution since they also provide extra services such as AV scanning, etc.Oh, and the flip side is these devices operate on much more stable hardware with much lower power envelopes than a completely wasteful pfsense machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249098</id>
	<title>go with cisco gear of eBay</title>
	<author>RoRo\_the\_Troll</author>
	<datestamp>1259317260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can do 100Mbps full speed with a cisco 2801 through NAT. Sure it's not cheap (average eBay price is around $500), but you get what you pay for. In addition to being able to push the 100Mbps you need you get all the extra feature of IOS (IPSec tunnels, IDS, SNMP management, QoS,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)


R.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can do 100Mbps full speed with a cisco 2801 through NAT .
Sure it 's not cheap ( average eBay price is around $ 500 ) , but you get what you pay for .
In addition to being able to push the 100Mbps you need you get all the extra feature of IOS ( IPSec tunnels , IDS , SNMP management , QoS , ... ) R .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can do 100Mbps full speed with a cisco 2801 through NAT.
Sure it's not cheap (average eBay price is around $500), but you get what you pay for.
In addition to being able to push the 100Mbps you need you get all the extra feature of IOS (IPSec tunnels, IDS, SNMP management, QoS, ...)


R.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251814</id>
	<title>Cisco 881w or 851w</title>
	<author>Kr1ll1n</author>
	<datestamp>1259334660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nuff said...... Under $500 for non wireless...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nuff said...... Under $ 500 for non wireless.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nuff said...... Under $500 for non wireless...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250590</id>
	<title>Pro Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259325180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get a $270 1U Supermicro server from Newegg and Vyatta.  Problem solved and TONS of additional benefits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get a $ 270 1U Supermicro server from Newegg and Vyatta .
Problem solved and TONS of additional benefits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get a $270 1U Supermicro server from Newegg and Vyatta.
Problem solved and TONS of additional benefits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252438</id>
	<title>Go with</title>
	<author>Guiness Boy</author>
	<datestamp>1259342760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sonicwall tz210</htmltext>
<tokenext>sonicwall tz210</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sonicwall tz210</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248864</id>
	<title>pfSense + econobox + gigabit ethernet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.pfsense.com/" title="pfsense.com" rel="nofollow">pfSsense</a> [pfsense.com] has a good interface and support for built in wireless if you want.  It'll take up more space and use more power, but the feature set is immense.  If you don't want to get something big and power hungry, you can put together a smaller <a href="http://www.pcengines.ch/order1.php?c=4" title="pcengines.ch" rel="nofollow">ALIX box</a> [pcengines.ch] that runs pfSense too.  But those are 10/100 ethernet jacks, so there's less room for growth.</p><p>IPCop is also good, I just switched to pfSense because we use it at work.  And we use it at work because IPCop doesn't do multiple WAN interfaces which wouldn't really matter for home use anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pfSsense [ pfsense.com ] has a good interface and support for built in wireless if you want .
It 'll take up more space and use more power , but the feature set is immense .
If you do n't want to get something big and power hungry , you can put together a smaller ALIX box [ pcengines.ch ] that runs pfSense too .
But those are 10/100 ethernet jacks , so there 's less room for growth.IPCop is also good , I just switched to pfSense because we use it at work .
And we use it at work because IPCop does n't do multiple WAN interfaces which would n't really matter for home use anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pfSsense [pfsense.com] has a good interface and support for built in wireless if you want.
It'll take up more space and use more power, but the feature set is immense.
If you don't want to get something big and power hungry, you can put together a smaller ALIX box [pcengines.ch] that runs pfSense too.
But those are 10/100 ethernet jacks, so there's less room for growth.IPCop is also good, I just switched to pfSense because we use it at work.
And we use it at work because IPCop doesn't do multiple WAN interfaces which wouldn't really matter for home use anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818</id>
	<title>I agree with TheRealMindChild</title>
	<author>majortom1981</author>
	<datestamp>1259315880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like another user stated use pfsense.  We had this problem at work. We are a library and just got 100/100 fiber service. Couldnt afford to buy some $10,000 router and our $1000 router couldnt handle the speeds.

Downloaded pfsense and put it on an old server and get full 100/100 speed. Its open source , has snort and everything. ITs free to use and they have a pay for support option as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like another user stated use pfsense .
We had this problem at work .
We are a library and just got 100/100 fiber service .
Couldnt afford to buy some $ 10,000 router and our $ 1000 router couldnt handle the speeds .
Downloaded pfsense and put it on an old server and get full 100/100 speed .
Its open source , has snort and everything .
ITs free to use and they have a pay for support option as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like another user stated use pfsense.
We had this problem at work.
We are a library and just got 100/100 fiber service.
Couldnt afford to buy some $10,000 router and our $1000 router couldnt handle the speeds.
Downloaded pfsense and put it on an old server and get full 100/100 speed.
Its open source , has snort and everything.
ITs free to use and they have a pay for support option as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249110</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Danborg</author>
	<datestamp>1259317260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't believe that no one has yet mentioned Untangle - <a href="http://www.untangle.com/" title="untangle.com" rel="nofollow">www.untangle.com</a> [untangle.com] or Endian <a href="http://www.endian.com/en/community/" title="endian.com" rel="nofollow">www.endian.com</a> [endian.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe that no one has yet mentioned Untangle - www.untangle.com [ untangle.com ] or Endian www.endian.com [ endian.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe that no one has yet mentioned Untangle - www.untangle.com [untangle.com] or Endian www.endian.com [endian.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255444</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>Orochi</author>
	<datestamp>1259433540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>or pfSense <a href="http://pfsense.com/" title="pfsense.com" rel="nofollow">http://pfsense.com/</a> [pfsense.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>or pfSense http : //pfsense.com/ [ pfsense.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or pfSense http://pfsense.com/ [pfsense.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252352</id>
	<title>Re:Linux PC</title>
	<author>Agripa</author>
	<datestamp>1259341620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.</p></div></blockquote><p>Those dinky little consumer routers invariably have the LAN ports connected through an ASIC switch with one port internally connected to the processor for routing and bridging to the WAN side so LAN to LAN traffic is not performance limited by the CPU.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The replies you 've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds , which of course you 've already figured out is nonsense.Those dinky little consumer routers invariably have the LAN ports connected through an ASIC switch with one port internally connected to the processor for routing and bridging to the WAN side so LAN to LAN traffic is not performance limited by the CPU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.Those dinky little consumer routers invariably have the LAN ports connected through an ASIC switch with one port internally connected to the processor for routing and bridging to the WAN side so LAN to LAN traffic is not performance limited by the CPU.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248804</id>
	<title>Wired or Wifi?</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1259315880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you seeing the performance degradation over a wired network, or over wireless?  Of course, I don't think I've ever even seen more than 54Mbps over a wireless connection on my own, to the router that is, so I it may not even matter, really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you seeing the performance degradation over a wired network , or over wireless ?
Of course , I do n't think I 've ever even seen more than 54Mbps over a wireless connection on my own , to the router that is , so I it may not even matter , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you seeing the performance degradation over a wired network, or over wireless?
Of course, I don't think I've ever even seen more than 54Mbps over a wireless connection on my own, to the router that is, so I it may not even matter, really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30257134</id>
	<title>Try the Ubiquiti RouterStation Pro</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259408220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://ubnt.com/products/rspro.php</p><p>I't's build for the embedded market.   The ARM cpu (MIPS 24K ISA)  is clocked at 680 mhz, and is overclockable to 800 mhz.   It ships with OpenWRT.   pfSense is in alpha now.   Ubiquiti just had a $200k contest for <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/06/0030256/Ubiquiti-Announces-RouterStation-Challenge-Winners" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">a better UI</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //ubnt.com/products/rspro.phpI't 's build for the embedded market .
The ARM cpu ( MIPS 24K ISA ) is clocked at 680 mhz , and is overclockable to 800 mhz .
It ships with OpenWRT .
pfSense is in alpha now .
Ubiquiti just had a $ 200k contest for a better UI [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://ubnt.com/products/rspro.phpI't's build for the embedded market.
The ARM cpu (MIPS 24K ISA)  is clocked at 680 mhz, and is overclockable to 800 mhz.
It ships with OpenWRT.
pfSense is in alpha now.
Ubiquiti just had a $200k contest for a better UI [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251932</id>
	<title>I'm a big fan of Buffalo</title>
	<author>ajlisows</author>
	<datestamp>1259335980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A few years back I was Sick of burning through Linksys WRT54-G Routers at the rate of one every nine months.  I said to hell with it and tried out the "Buffalo" WHR-HP-54G.  It started to show some signs of slowing down in the past six months, so I tried to replace it with a WRT54-G, a Linksys Wireless N, a Netgear wireless N, and a D-Link Wireless N.  None of those routers gave me the throughput that my 4 year old Buffalo did.  The Buffalo stock firmware leaves something to be desired, but it was easily flashed with DD-WRT.</p><p>Now, I admit that this is a little pathetic, but my in-laws really treat me quite well and despite being over 30, still drop $200 or so dollars on my wife, her two siblings, and me for Christmas despite the fact that they are not even close to being rich.  So, my list included a few items with the new Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH.  Sadly, that is the cheapest Buffalo with 10/100/1000 speeds on the LAN ports.  While I have not tried this router yet, my past experience with the Buffalo Routers has been so positive that I have no problem recommending that you try it out.</p><p>Another crazy thing with Buffalo, I was browsing through the reviews of a Buffalo product on Amazon or Newegg or some other website.  One of the guys from Tech support had popped in to answer some questions and also tossed his own EMAIL Address out there for people.  It was really early one morning (3 AM central) and I had quick question so I threw it out there.  I got a response from the guy 30 minutes later.  That was pretty wild.  I wouldn't expect that kind of service all the time for a low end consumer product, but it gives me confidence that their support team takes some pride in their work.</p><p>Note that I have never worked for Buffalo or am affiliated with them in any way... I've just been very impressed with them in my (albeit small) experience with their products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years back I was Sick of burning through Linksys WRT54-G Routers at the rate of one every nine months .
I said to hell with it and tried out the " Buffalo " WHR-HP-54G .
It started to show some signs of slowing down in the past six months , so I tried to replace it with a WRT54-G , a Linksys Wireless N , a Netgear wireless N , and a D-Link Wireless N. None of those routers gave me the throughput that my 4 year old Buffalo did .
The Buffalo stock firmware leaves something to be desired , but it was easily flashed with DD-WRT.Now , I admit that this is a little pathetic , but my in-laws really treat me quite well and despite being over 30 , still drop $ 200 or so dollars on my wife , her two siblings , and me for Christmas despite the fact that they are not even close to being rich .
So , my list included a few items with the new Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH .
Sadly , that is the cheapest Buffalo with 10/100/1000 speeds on the LAN ports .
While I have not tried this router yet , my past experience with the Buffalo Routers has been so positive that I have no problem recommending that you try it out.Another crazy thing with Buffalo , I was browsing through the reviews of a Buffalo product on Amazon or Newegg or some other website .
One of the guys from Tech support had popped in to answer some questions and also tossed his own EMAIL Address out there for people .
It was really early one morning ( 3 AM central ) and I had quick question so I threw it out there .
I got a response from the guy 30 minutes later .
That was pretty wild .
I would n't expect that kind of service all the time for a low end consumer product , but it gives me confidence that their support team takes some pride in their work.Note that I have never worked for Buffalo or am affiliated with them in any way... I 've just been very impressed with them in my ( albeit small ) experience with their products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years back I was Sick of burning through Linksys WRT54-G Routers at the rate of one every nine months.
I said to hell with it and tried out the "Buffalo" WHR-HP-54G.
It started to show some signs of slowing down in the past six months, so I tried to replace it with a WRT54-G, a Linksys Wireless N, a Netgear wireless N, and a D-Link Wireless N.  None of those routers gave me the throughput that my 4 year old Buffalo did.
The Buffalo stock firmware leaves something to be desired, but it was easily flashed with DD-WRT.Now, I admit that this is a little pathetic, but my in-laws really treat me quite well and despite being over 30, still drop $200 or so dollars on my wife, her two siblings, and me for Christmas despite the fact that they are not even close to being rich.
So, my list included a few items with the new Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH.
Sadly, that is the cheapest Buffalo with 10/100/1000 speeds on the LAN ports.
While I have not tried this router yet, my past experience with the Buffalo Routers has been so positive that I have no problem recommending that you try it out.Another crazy thing with Buffalo, I was browsing through the reviews of a Buffalo product on Amazon or Newegg or some other website.
One of the guys from Tech support had popped in to answer some questions and also tossed his own EMAIL Address out there for people.
It was really early one morning (3 AM central) and I had quick question so I threw it out there.
I got a response from the guy 30 minutes later.
That was pretty wild.
I wouldn't expect that kind of service all the time for a low end consumer product, but it gives me confidence that their support team takes some pride in their work.Note that I have never worked for Buffalo or am affiliated with them in any way... I've just been very impressed with them in my (albeit small) experience with their products.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251490</id>
	<title>Dependant on how you want to go</title>
	<author>teknosapien</author>
	<datestamp>1259331300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use a FreeBSD box as my home router on old equipment with a commercial grade WAP interface for my wireless an old 3com managed switch that hasn't failed me yet -- it also acts as a firewall
in 10 years It hasn't failed me OS wise although I've had hardware burn out on me causing a rebuild it works flawlessly</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a FreeBSD box as my home router on old equipment with a commercial grade WAP interface for my wireless an old 3com managed switch that has n't failed me yet -- it also acts as a firewall in 10 years It has n't failed me OS wise although I 've had hardware burn out on me causing a rebuild it works flawlessly</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a FreeBSD box as my home router on old equipment with a commercial grade WAP interface for my wireless an old 3com managed switch that hasn't failed me yet -- it also acts as a firewall
in 10 years It hasn't failed me OS wise although I've had hardware burn out on me causing a rebuild it works flawlessly</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249828</id>
	<title>Endian firewall if you do go the DIY router route</title>
	<author>konigstein</author>
	<datestamp>1259321040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've had pretty good success with the community version of Endian firewall, as well as the "commercial" 25 user license. It's got a handy little web accessible interface, can handle up to 6 interfaces (and I use all of them), has baked in snort capabilities, etc. Depending on the hardware route you go, it can support the high speeds you are looking for. I haven't conducted extensive bandwidth tests, however I was able to cap out my FiOS WAN connection at 35/15 Mbps with a 10/100 d-link NIC. Internal tests across gigabit NICs have hovered around 300Mbps, however there's several network devices in play that made it hard to determine the actual choke points. The community version is easily install and play-able, the commercial version as well (but with customization is soooooooo awesome). The downsides are that it doesn't come with a lot of hardware (wireless cards?), and to support that you have to "spin up a development server" to compile the driver into a binary for it to work. (yes, even with the commercial version *grumble*). The Endian company also sells hardware appliances, if you wanted to contact their sales team.<br> <br>

The community version is free, but offers only forum support.<br>
The commercial version (25 user enterprise) runs about $450.<br> <br>

Both can be found at: <a href="http://www.endian.com/" title="endian.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.endian.com/</a> [endian.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had pretty good success with the community version of Endian firewall , as well as the " commercial " 25 user license .
It 's got a handy little web accessible interface , can handle up to 6 interfaces ( and I use all of them ) , has baked in snort capabilities , etc .
Depending on the hardware route you go , it can support the high speeds you are looking for .
I have n't conducted extensive bandwidth tests , however I was able to cap out my FiOS WAN connection at 35/15 Mbps with a 10/100 d-link NIC .
Internal tests across gigabit NICs have hovered around 300Mbps , however there 's several network devices in play that made it hard to determine the actual choke points .
The community version is easily install and play-able , the commercial version as well ( but with customization is soooooooo awesome ) .
The downsides are that it does n't come with a lot of hardware ( wireless cards ?
) , and to support that you have to " spin up a development server " to compile the driver into a binary for it to work .
( yes , even with the commercial version * grumble * ) .
The Endian company also sells hardware appliances , if you wanted to contact their sales team .
The community version is free , but offers only forum support .
The commercial version ( 25 user enterprise ) runs about $ 450 .
Both can be found at : http : //www.endian.com/ [ endian.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had pretty good success with the community version of Endian firewall, as well as the "commercial" 25 user license.
It's got a handy little web accessible interface, can handle up to 6 interfaces (and I use all of them), has baked in snort capabilities, etc.
Depending on the hardware route you go, it can support the high speeds you are looking for.
I haven't conducted extensive bandwidth tests, however I was able to cap out my FiOS WAN connection at 35/15 Mbps with a 10/100 d-link NIC.
Internal tests across gigabit NICs have hovered around 300Mbps, however there's several network devices in play that made it hard to determine the actual choke points.
The community version is easily install and play-able, the commercial version as well (but with customization is soooooooo awesome).
The downsides are that it doesn't come with a lot of hardware (wireless cards?
), and to support that you have to "spin up a development server" to compile the driver into a binary for it to work.
(yes, even with the commercial version *grumble*).
The Endian company also sells hardware appliances, if you wanted to contact their sales team.
The community version is free, but offers only forum support.
The commercial version (25 user enterprise) runs about $450.
Both can be found at: http://www.endian.com/ [endian.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</id>
	<title>Linux PC</title>
	<author>seanadams.com</author>
	<datestamp>1259315760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.</p><p>For a standalone firewall box you might need to look at something like a Cisco ASA. Not cheap but they will at least specify the actual NAT throughput for whatever model you pick.</p><p>The other way to go is to roll your own on a decent PC with Linux which will get you a few hundred Mbps easily. For example a Mac Mini or FitPC will be fast enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The replies you 've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds , which of course you 've already figured out is nonsense.For a standalone firewall box you might need to look at something like a Cisco ASA .
Not cheap but they will at least specify the actual NAT throughput for whatever model you pick.The other way to go is to roll your own on a decent PC with Linux which will get you a few hundred Mbps easily .
For example a Mac Mini or FitPC will be fast enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The replies you've got so far seem to think that just because a router has gigabit ports that it can do NAT at gigabit speeds, which of course you've already figured out is nonsense.For a standalone firewall box you might need to look at something like a Cisco ASA.
Not cheap but they will at least specify the actual NAT throughput for whatever model you pick.The other way to go is to roll your own on a decent PC with Linux which will get you a few hundred Mbps easily.
For example a Mac Mini or FitPC will be fast enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250304</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>paul248</author>
	<datestamp>1259323560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is bad advice.  The WRT54GL is *not* capable of routing at much faster than 30Mbps, because the LAN and WAN ports are on the same switch, connected to one physical Ethernet interface.</p><p>You at least need a device with 2 physical Ethernet interfaces, like the <a href="https://dev.openwrt.org/wiki/ar71xx" title="openwrt.org">ar71xx</a> [openwrt.org] platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is bad advice .
The WRT54GL is * not * capable of routing at much faster than 30Mbps , because the LAN and WAN ports are on the same switch , connected to one physical Ethernet interface.You at least need a device with 2 physical Ethernet interfaces , like the ar71xx [ openwrt.org ] platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is bad advice.
The WRT54GL is *not* capable of routing at much faster than 30Mbps, because the LAN and WAN ports are on the same switch, connected to one physical Ethernet interface.You at least need a device with 2 physical Ethernet interfaces, like the ar71xx [openwrt.org] platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250630</id>
	<title>OpenBSD on an old dell FTW</title>
	<author>Narcocide</author>
	<datestamp>1259325360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something with 64MB of ram and a PII-400 or faster should be enough to run packetfilter for a 30mbps or faster connection right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something with 64MB of ram and a PII-400 or faster should be enough to run packetfilter for a 30mbps or faster connection right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something with 64MB of ram and a PII-400 or faster should be enough to run packetfilter for a 30mbps or faster connection right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253226</id>
	<title>DrayTek routers</title>
	<author>djc6</author>
	<datestamp>1259400300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've recently discovered DrayTek routers - they're apparently popular outside of the states.  The 2930 series is rated up to 70Mbps, the 2950 series 90Mbps.  There might be beefier solutions in their lineup, but these are the two I was looking at. I came across them looking for a Dual-WAN router - I eventually settled on the 2930 router (non-WiFi) to load balance my Cable Modem and DSL connections.  The combined upstream/downstream bandwidth on both connections was more than most entry-level Dual-WAN routers could handle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've recently discovered DrayTek routers - they 're apparently popular outside of the states .
The 2930 series is rated up to 70Mbps , the 2950 series 90Mbps .
There might be beefier solutions in their lineup , but these are the two I was looking at .
I came across them looking for a Dual-WAN router - I eventually settled on the 2930 router ( non-WiFi ) to load balance my Cable Modem and DSL connections .
The combined upstream/downstream bandwidth on both connections was more than most entry-level Dual-WAN routers could handle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've recently discovered DrayTek routers - they're apparently popular outside of the states.
The 2930 series is rated up to 70Mbps, the 2950 series 90Mbps.
There might be beefier solutions in their lineup, but these are the two I was looking at.
I came across them looking for a Dual-WAN router - I eventually settled on the 2930 router (non-WiFi) to load balance my Cable Modem and DSL connections.
The combined upstream/downstream bandwidth on both connections was more than most entry-level Dual-WAN routers could handle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249244</id>
	<title>Only one interface.</title>
	<author>zeng</author>
	<datestamp>1259318100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any one those cheap Linksys / D-Link routers will be limited to 30-40mbs because there is really only one 100mbps MII interface to the CPU. The uplink and LAN interfaces are separated out through VLANing with the built-in switch. So basically, all traffic has to go over the same 100mbps interface *twice*, thus halving the throughput. You can get an old Sun Netra X1 with dual NICs off of eBay for like $50.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any one those cheap Linksys / D-Link routers will be limited to 30-40mbs because there is really only one 100mbps MII interface to the CPU .
The uplink and LAN interfaces are separated out through VLANing with the built-in switch .
So basically , all traffic has to go over the same 100mbps interface * twice * , thus halving the throughput .
You can get an old Sun Netra X1 with dual NICs off of eBay for like $ 50 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any one those cheap Linksys / D-Link routers will be limited to 30-40mbs because there is really only one 100mbps MII interface to the CPU.
The uplink and LAN interfaces are separated out through VLANing with the built-in switch.
So basically, all traffic has to go over the same 100mbps interface *twice*, thus halving the throughput.
You can get an old Sun Netra X1 with dual NICs off of eBay for like $50.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252844</id>
	<title>Re:WRT-160NL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No modems? What would you call the box that has a fiber port on one side and an ethernet port on the other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No modems ?
What would you call the box that has a fiber port on one side and an ethernet port on the other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No modems?
What would you call the box that has a fiber port on one side and an ethernet port on the other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249392</id>
	<title>You poor bastard</title>
	<author>Sloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1259318820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps (60, 80 and 100 Mbps). However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NAT</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't have an answer to your problem (other than "get a computer"), but you have my deepest sympathies.  It is so hard to hear of my fellow human being having such horrific adversities inflicted upon them, and I cannot help but wonder: could this misfortune fall upon <em>me</em> some day?</p><p>I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence, and somehow, god-willing, find a reason to keep on living, in order to set an example for others who may some day suffer the same fate.  No matter how dark and hopeless things look right now, don't give up!  If you can survive this calamity, maybe I can overcome my own problems as well.</p><p>Bless you, my friend, and good luck!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps ( 60 , 80 and 100 Mbps ) .
However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NATI do n't have an answer to your problem ( other than " get a computer " ) , but you have my deepest sympathies .
It is so hard to hear of my fellow human being having such horrific adversities inflicted upon them , and I can not help but wonder : could this misfortune fall upon me some day ? I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence , and somehow , god-willing , find a reason to keep on living , in order to set an example for others who may some day suffer the same fate .
No matter how dark and hopeless things look right now , do n't give up !
If you can survive this calamity , maybe I can overcome my own problems as well.Bless you , my friend , and good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My cable company has recently begun to offer Internet access plans with speeds over 30 Mbps (60, 80 and 100 Mbps).
However my D-link router is unable to go beyond 30 Mbps if I use NATI don't have an answer to your problem (other than "get a computer"), but you have my deepest sympathies.
It is so hard to hear of my fellow human being having such horrific adversities inflicted upon them, and I cannot help but wonder: could this misfortune fall upon me some day?I can only hope that you overcome the terrible burden of a 100 Mpbs internet connection thrust upon you and your residence, and somehow, god-willing, find a reason to keep on living, in order to set an example for others who may some day suffer the same fate.
No matter how dark and hopeless things look right now, don't give up!
If you can survive this calamity, maybe I can overcome my own problems as well.Bless you, my friend, and good luck!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248822</id>
	<title>Cisco 891</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259315880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The newly released Cisco 891 is definitely what you want.   It has a good CPU which can do NAT at high speeds and many many flows<br>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10194/index.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The newly released Cisco 891 is definitely what you want .
It has a good CPU which can do NAT at high speeds and many many flowshttp : //www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10194/index.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The newly released Cisco 891 is definitely what you want.
It has a good CPU which can do NAT at high speeds and many many flowshttp://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10194/index.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253466</id>
	<title>Linksys RVS-4000, ASUS SL500</title>
	<author>misnohmer</author>
	<datestamp>1259406480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a Linksys RVS-4000 between two local LANs, NAT speeds over 250Mbps no problem (will likely go higher, it's just windows file sharing peaks at 250-350Mpbs). Used also to use ASUS SL500 in the 100Mbps days reaching over 90Mbps, though seriously would not recommend their user interface (I'm not sure if something got lost in translation between the design engineers, or what, but it has the most unintuitive interface I have EVER seen).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a Linksys RVS-4000 between two local LANs , NAT speeds over 250Mbps no problem ( will likely go higher , it 's just windows file sharing peaks at 250-350Mpbs ) .
Used also to use ASUS SL500 in the 100Mbps days reaching over 90Mbps , though seriously would not recommend their user interface ( I 'm not sure if something got lost in translation between the design engineers , or what , but it has the most unintuitive interface I have EVER seen ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a Linksys RVS-4000 between two local LANs, NAT speeds over 250Mbps no problem (will likely go higher, it's just windows file sharing peaks at 250-350Mpbs).
Used also to use ASUS SL500 in the 100Mbps days reaching over 90Mbps, though seriously would not recommend their user interface (I'm not sure if something got lost in translation between the design engineers, or what, but it has the most unintuitive interface I have EVER seen).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846</id>
	<title>You must be new here.</title>
	<author>ErikTheRed</author>
	<datestamp>1259316060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought everyone on Slashdot built their own firewalls using Linux and / or OpenBSD. WTF? I guess they'll give an account to just about anyone these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought everyone on Slashdot built their own firewalls using Linux and / or OpenBSD .
WTF ? I guess they 'll give an account to just about anyone these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought everyone on Slashdot built their own firewalls using Linux and / or OpenBSD.
WTF? I guess they'll give an account to just about anyone these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253066</id>
	<title>Re:The best</title>
	<author>dysan27</author>
	<datestamp>1259440320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get an access point, yes it's another piece of kit to worry about, but then you can get a good router, AND a good wireless AP, and not have to worry about getting one device that is BOTH at the same time.<br> <br>And most wireless routers can be used as an AP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get an access point , yes it 's another piece of kit to worry about , but then you can get a good router , AND a good wireless AP , and not have to worry about getting one device that is BOTH at the same time .
And most wireless routers can be used as an AP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get an access point, yes it's another piece of kit to worry about, but then you can get a good router, AND a good wireless AP, and not have to worry about getting one device that is BOTH at the same time.
And most wireless routers can be used as an AP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994</id>
	<title>Cisco</title>
	<author>gluffis</author>
	<datestamp>1259316780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore. Does 150Mbps according to Cisco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore .
Does 150Mbps according to Cisco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the Cisco ASA 5505 is not that expensive anymore.
Does 150Mbps according to Cisco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249176</id>
	<title>pfSense</title>
	<author>ATLHivemind</author>
	<datestamp>1259317740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>pfSense
Handles multiple WAN links handily (though your modems needs to have a sane failure mode (e.g. when the line is dead, drop everything) my cheapy DSL modem gets saturated by torrents and dies but still lets pings
and other little heartbeats through making the router think all is well, the results are very strange.
Has add-ons like BandwidthD: pretty traffic graphs and a graphical version of nTop: you may not know who's stealing your bandwidth, but you will once ntop is on the case.

I have mine running on an old Athlon64 (my eldest box, a P3 is busy with Asterisk), runs great, but I have a deployment on a PII-350 with 128MB of RAM elsewhere.

Oh yeah... you lucky sonofabitch!</htmltext>
<tokenext>pfSense Handles multiple WAN links handily ( though your modems needs to have a sane failure mode ( e.g .
when the line is dead , drop everything ) my cheapy DSL modem gets saturated by torrents and dies but still lets pings and other little heartbeats through making the router think all is well , the results are very strange .
Has add-ons like BandwidthD : pretty traffic graphs and a graphical version of nTop : you may not know who 's stealing your bandwidth , but you will once ntop is on the case .
I have mine running on an old Athlon64 ( my eldest box , a P3 is busy with Asterisk ) , runs great , but I have a deployment on a PII-350 with 128MB of RAM elsewhere .
Oh yeah... you lucky sonofabitch !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pfSense
Handles multiple WAN links handily (though your modems needs to have a sane failure mode (e.g.
when the line is dead, drop everything) my cheapy DSL modem gets saturated by torrents and dies but still lets pings
and other little heartbeats through making the router think all is well, the results are very strange.
Has add-ons like BandwidthD: pretty traffic graphs and a graphical version of nTop: you may not know who's stealing your bandwidth, but you will once ntop is on the case.
I have mine running on an old Athlon64 (my eldest box, a P3 is busy with Asterisk), runs great, but I have a deployment on a PII-350 with 128MB of RAM elsewhere.
Oh yeah... you lucky sonofabitch!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249410</id>
	<title>Re:Linux PC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second using a Cisco ASA.  I have 50Mbps fiber and the ASA 5505 is able to keep up with my connection. Before I got the ASA I did some throughput tests at work. I just did a basic test using NAT and a relatively small access list (10 items) and the throughput was about 60-70Mbps. Cisco's claims are somewhat inaccurate though. On their website it says the 5505 is capable of 150Mbps. That is kind of hard when the ports are 10/100. I think what they mean is the processor is capable of that throughput.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second using a Cisco ASA .
I have 50Mbps fiber and the ASA 5505 is able to keep up with my connection .
Before I got the ASA I did some throughput tests at work .
I just did a basic test using NAT and a relatively small access list ( 10 items ) and the throughput was about 60-70Mbps .
Cisco 's claims are somewhat inaccurate though .
On their website it says the 5505 is capable of 150Mbps .
That is kind of hard when the ports are 10/100 .
I think what they mean is the processor is capable of that throughput .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second using a Cisco ASA.
I have 50Mbps fiber and the ASA 5505 is able to keep up with my connection.
Before I got the ASA I did some throughput tests at work.
I just did a basic test using NAT and a relatively small access list (10 items) and the throughput was about 60-70Mbps.
Cisco's claims are somewhat inaccurate though.
On their website it says the 5505 is capable of 150Mbps.
That is kind of hard when the ports are 10/100.
I think what they mean is the processor is capable of that throughput.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251066</id>
	<title>Get something that runs...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259327880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend you get an device that supports Tomato. http://www.polarcloud.com/tomato</p><p>Or you could always go the extra mile and make yourself an Linux router. Personally this would be my pick as it has many advantages.</p><p>For example you could run an Torrent / Usenet client on it or use it as a Bitlbee server. http://www.bitlbee.org/main.php/news.r.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend you get an device that supports Tomato .
http : //www.polarcloud.com/tomatoOr you could always go the extra mile and make yourself an Linux router .
Personally this would be my pick as it has many advantages.For example you could run an Torrent / Usenet client on it or use it as a Bitlbee server .
http : //www.bitlbee.org/main.php/news.r.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend you get an device that supports Tomato.
http://www.polarcloud.com/tomatoOr you could always go the extra mile and make yourself an Linux router.
Personally this would be my pick as it has many advantages.For example you could run an Torrent / Usenet client on it or use it as a Bitlbee server.
http://www.bitlbee.org/main.php/news.r.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251984</id>
	<title>upgrading router</title>
	<author>geckopelli</author>
	<datestamp>1259336760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>NETGEAR FIREWALL ROUTER FVS336G or something similar.  Add a gigabit switch and your are set.  If you are upgrading networking equipment, may as well add a hardware firewall and not depend on operating system firewalls.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NETGEAR FIREWALL ROUTER FVS336G or something similar .
Add a gigabit switch and your are set .
If you are upgrading networking equipment , may as well add a hardware firewall and not depend on operating system firewalls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NETGEAR FIREWALL ROUTER FVS336G or something similar.
Add a gigabit switch and your are set.
If you are upgrading networking equipment, may as well add a hardware firewall and not depend on operating system firewalls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249570</id>
	<title>Boo fucking hoo</title>
	<author>NoobixCube</author>
	<datestamp>1259319660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm flat out getting EIGHT megabits a second in this webforsaken country below the equator (guess which one!... Australia...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm flat out getting EIGHT megabits a second in this webforsaken country below the equator ( guess which one ! .. .
Australia... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm flat out getting EIGHT megabits a second in this webforsaken country below the equator (guess which one!...
Australia...).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30267456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30254658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1945237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248928
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30254658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30267456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249370
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30253066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30255444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249470
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30250948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249274
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30256080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30251092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30252844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30248822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1945237.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1945237.30249114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
