What's the best (least botnet, glitch free, won't-die-after-12-months...

What's the best (least botnet, glitch free, won't-die-after-12-months, accepts aftermarket firmware) router on the market right now? I'm sick of buying a new Asus every year.

Attached: Best-wireless-routers.jpg (765x428, 58K)

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/dp/B077FXF6Y8/
ebay.com/itm/142979550689
wiki.openwrt.org/toh/xiaomi/mir3
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833127727
fiber.salt.ch/en/
amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Edgerouter-Router-Desktop-Black/dp/B0144R449W
amazon.com/Ubiquiti-EdgeRouter-Advanced-Gigabit-Ethernet/dp/B00YFJT29C
smallnetbuilder.com/lanwan/lanwan-reviews/33140-microtik-rb750gr3-hex-router-reviewed?showall=&start=1
smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/bar/179-wan-to-lan-tcp/35
pcengines.ch/apu2.htm
store.netgate.com/SG-3100.aspx
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Build a custom pfSense router and be done with that shill garbage.

Wireless should be provided by standalone access points that are connected via ethernet backhaul and positioned in the most appropriate location for your wireless coverage needs.

Why anyone buys routers with wireless access points built in, I will never understand. It's like you guys WANT shitty performance.

Orbii

Have you tried the Orbi or other mesh networking solutions?

Attached: Orbi.jpg (1200x1200, 127K)

buy a 1u server and install opnsense

Mesh is garbage without wired backhaul, at which point i'd rather have something under my own control, not some shitty botnet company collecting "anonymous" usage statistics from my access points.


To answer your question, yes I have used mesh, and no, I wouldn't recommend them to pretty much anyone, almost no average household has enough wifi devices to bother needing a mesh system. Unless you live in a 3 story mansion with over 5000 square feet of space, a mesh system just doesn't make sense, and EVEN in that situation, i'd rather set up my own access points and run them myself, the "mesh" aspects of the system are really only going to be beneficial in a few niche situations, which i'd rarely, if ever need.

>Why anyone buys routers with wireless access points built in, I will never understand
Probably because putting ten Intel gigabit NICs in a router PC would cost four times as much, and still not have wireless or a warranty.

use a single gigabit NIC and a 1gbps switch.

Once it's on the LAN side of things, any old switch should do the trick.

If you think you REALLY need it, get a 4 port intel gigabit NIC, one port for WAN, 3 for LAN. add switches on the LAN links you need more LAN devices on. Seperate any devices you expect to NEED traffic priorities so they terminate on their own intel NIC port instead of sharing the same link with multiple clients.


it's not as difficult as you're pretending.

OP here. My network is in my crawl space, so not only don't I want to have the wattage of a PC down there, I don't want the bulk or fans or noise or expense. I appreciate it tho.

>so not only don't I want to have the wattage of a PC down there, I don't want the bulk or fans or noise or expense. I appreciate it tho


Not my fault you're a retard

Actual pfSense PCs use ultra low power CPUs and generally draw under 20w. It might be more than an Asus router or some shit using low power ASICs, but it's FAR from some desktop PC needing 90W+, nor is it going to need a fan.
Almost all pfSense boxes for home use are passively cooled.

amazon.com/dp/B077FXF6Y8/

ubiquiti's edgerouters are fucking excellent and are dirt cheap for what they offer, but if that's not an option or your paranoid of the botnet, consumer routers are basically not worth it - especially security wise - your best bet this way is to check what router models are compatible with firmware like openwrt or librecmc. a final note on consumer routers: if you're looking for decent VPN throughput, avoid limpdick consumer routers completely.

if you want freedom, control, and security, you'll likely be looking into mini PCs with 2+ intel or broadcom nics - there are various manufacturers for these such as qotom or protectli if you want a really powerful router, but there's also PCengine's APU2 which uses coreboot which is neat. with all of this freedom though, you need the knowledge on how to configure it right. this website is really helpful: routersecurity.org

Hm.

What about something like this? $140 on egay
ebay.com/itm/142979550689

Attached: s-l1600.jpg (1000x1000, 103K)

>spend hundreds of dollars and hours of your life learning how to build a fucking wireless router yourself
>rework your entire home networking scheme
>waste literally weeks of time to get 3% better throughput

Meanwhile in the real world:
>hey dave, I just bought a new wireless router
>oh yeah?
>yeah it was $60 and now I get like pretty good download speed everywhere in my house
>oh that's cool

Attached: 1539603476117.jpg (433x427, 86K)

I wouldn't use that, but I have 1gbps internet, so I need something much faster than that.

That's 1.5ghz dual core with a TDP of 17w.

What I posted was a 1.7ghz Dual core with hyperthreading (so 4 threads instead of 2), with a TDP of 15w.

The 1007u celeron CPU also doesn't support AES-Ni which is basically required if you want to do any sort of VPN offloading.


If you shop around, or if you're willing to wait on shipping from china, you should be able to find something better in a similar price range, maybe stretch your budget an extra $100 or so.

>if you're looking for decent VPN throughput
Question: why do routers have VPN capabilities? Is this for people to route all their internet traffic through an external VPN, or is this for people to "phone home" when they're away so they can route everything through their home internet?

Just curious what it's used for.

What does a pfsense x86 build give you that a DDWRT/Tomato based Netgear router doesn't?

I want pfsense fags to die.
this ^
a sense of smug superiority in something that uses a massive amount of power and processing power that a router will never use

offloads encryption from the client device to the router instead.

Depending on the router, it could have an ASIC for encryption VASTLY improving performance over your desktop, AND use less power while doing that.

The only reasons you think any of that is accurate is because you yourself have never done anything close to it.
It doesn't take that long to setup the first time, and after that it basically runs itself.

Further, no $60 router would be able to handle my 1gbps internet anyway, so it's kinda bullshit number to throw out to begin with, any consumer router for gigabit speeds is going to run you at least $150+, and generally more.

Whatever it may be, it's definitely not Asus. That brand wants its COCK up ur ass to use their "features".

Buy a router from minifree with LibreCMC preinstalled for $50. Has 600mbp/s for wireless and 1GBP/s for LAN.

PfSense is overkill for home wireless imho. You get a libreboot tier router for a decent price from them.

Interesting. Is encryption really that big of a load that a modern desktop would benefit from it being offloaded?

No wireless connection can carry 1gbps, unless you're talking about something stupid like an ideal radio anechoic chamber with the router 5 feet from the client and nothing but a vacuum between them.

Maybe I'm wrong here. I'm not, but maybe. As soon as you're in the real world, put even a single wall between client and router, and you will not be getting more than a few hundred mbps at the outside.

No clue. I'd however recommend throwing OpenWRT on this ~$35 router and calling it a day wiki.openwrt.org/toh/xiaomi/mir3

>I'm sick of buying a new Asus every year.
Wait, why would you do that - Asus routers shouldn't break that easily? Throw on some good firmware and use it for 5+ years.

>paying $150 for a gigabit router
>not buying some shitty $40 router and trunking 2 ports

You pay for gigabit, but let me tell you, your ISP isn't giving you gigabit. Gigabit routers are almost entirely useless spar a business application
this ^^^^

this

OP you want a cisco 3700 in standalone mode.

Pretty much this that's why I would like a ~$150 product that gives me full gigabit on LAN and WAN, and won't crap out like Asus does. Honestly I can reuse my Asus for wireless, which I barely use anyway, I just need the router bit.

Anybody have a cheap solution for a solid gigabit ethernet-only router? Maybe something I can put DDWRT or Tomato on and not have to learn to code to get my chinese cartoon pornography?

>if you want to do any sort of VPN offloading.
I don't.

I only need 200mbps for my fiber. My current Asus is topping out at ~110mbps which I read is a CPU bottleneck issue.

>No wireless connection can carry 1gbps
I'm talking wired.

No sub $100 router can generally support WAN/LAN connections beyond ~600-800mbps, full gigabit WAN/LAN capabilities tend to start at around the $150-200 price point for consumer branded routers.

Now if you're looking at specific high performance for low price stuff like Mikrotik there are some options under $100 without wifi for gigabit connections, but meh, i'd rather run my own shit.


>You pay for gigabit, but let me tell you, your ISP isn't giving you gigabit
Really? It's close enough to gigabit in real world scenarios for me.

Attached: 2018-10-27 12_40_58.png (775x101, 9K)

I've got a 1gbps connection as well and consumer routers are failing me, even $300 ones. Would you mind dumping some info so I can get out of router hell? Btw it's not my cables, if I plug right into the modem I get 980+ up and down, use a router and best I can hope for is 700ish

I want you to self reflect on the fact that your a torrent fag that pays for, and for some reason utilizes a full gigbit connection for torrenting.

Sure, buy a router that specifically advertises 1gbps WAN support (Nighthawk X6S or similar)

Or build a pfSense router or similar BSD based routing box.

> You pay for gigabit, but let me tell you, your ISP isn't giving you gigabit
Typically it's best effort, but ... yea.

We got residential 10GBE symmetrical over here now for ~$50/month. Sure, it's again only best effort rather than guaranteed sustained near the maximum, but you sure want at least a GBE router for that. Bandwidth is cheap on fiber optical lines.

> no $60 router would be able to handle my 1gbps internet anyway
Why not? The Xiaomi 3g router should be basically fine, and it's more $35 than $60.

AES-NI is a requirement for pfSense. Won't run without it starting with 2.5

my options are 100mbps and 1gbps, what the fuck would YOU choose?

Attached: 2018-07-17 09_19_09.png (1214x1686, 683K)

that dumb tranny bitch wants you to pay $60 for a netgear router with FREE software flashed on it and demands that you pay via wire transfer because paypal and other payment method knows that its absolutely retarded "business"

> I've got a 1gbps connection as well and consumer routers are failing me, even $300 ones.
How exactly are they failing you? In the sense that they often drop connections and go down to 100Mbit or less, or in the sense that you might mainly be running at like 850Mbit/s?

then move to a different neighborhood you mong

>Xiaomi 3g router
2x LAN port, 10/100Mbps (Auto MDI/MDIX)
1x RJ45 WAN port, 10/100Mbps (Auto MDI/MDIX)

yeah, i'm sure those 100mbps ethernet ports will work great with my 945mbps gigabit connection.

>move away from faster internet.

Why? I would be paying a similar price for slower speeds.

>fuck mesh!
>btw what's the best retard spider router I can get for the same price :3

As in, they cap at 700-800mbps most likely, he will never see faster speeds than that, because most consumer routers can't handle full gigabit routing across WAN/LAN interface.

I've got an issue where it seems every router I set up lasts for maybe a year before it begins having issues with the wireless. Its shit like where the LAN has full speed but wireless will connect but won't allow traffic on the 2.4 and the 5gh won't assign an IP.

Whats a good router for gigabit that i can throw OpenWRT on?

>No sub $100 router can generally support WAN/LAN connections beyond ~600-800mbps

Hmm. Well, I have a D-Link DIR-878 which goes for $105, and it can fully saturate gigabit LAN if I'm transferring between SSDs or RAM. 115 MB/s or so. This is it: newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833127727

Maybe it's different through WAN but I can't imagine it would have different capabilities between ports than it does through the modem. I don't have gigabit internet to test that with (thanks American ISPs) though, so that's just a guess.

Wrong model, you presumably got version 3. The 3G has gigabit ports.

>fully saturate gigabit LAN
LAN is WAYY fucking easier than WAN/LAN traffic. It's a totally different operation.

WAN/LAN and LAN/WAN is much harder for your router to do. LAN/LAN is dead simple.

Are you complaining about having no choice for internet through a shitty provider or are you praising a shitty provider for providing an unnecessary speed as your only alternative to slow grandma internet for an exorbitant price?

There is also the TCP and other protocol overhead, you'll never get exactly 1000Mbits

This looks great, is there an alternative in the US who takes normal payment from actual working humans? And preferably something that can do 1gbps over WAN (that says 300mbps tested) in case I'm able to get full gigabit in the future?

Sure, might be 850mbit or something. Is that a big issue? You already need a gigabit router anyhow, and I don't think it's likely he could get a 850Mbit plan.

>The 3G has gigabit ports.
sick, MT7621A MIPS dual-core 880MHz, a CPU used in dozens of other routers that also can't achieve actual gigabit WAN/LAN speeds.

1. You can use online banking.
2. Who cares who sells it. The hardware matters.
3. The software installation is kinda difficult iirc and requires investing in flashing hardware. It's easier to let minifree do it

Neither, i'm saying between the options of gigabit DOCSIS with 35mbps upload, or Gigabit fiber with full gigabit speeds both down and up. I'll take the fiber.

100mbps is the same price as gigabit at the time I signed up, so of course I went with gigabit.

My point is why the fuck should I have anything BESIDES gigabit? I'm paying under $100 month for something many people couldn't get even if they wanted to pay $500 a month.

>and I don't think it's likely he could get a 850Mbit plan.
lol what the fuck are you talking about?
He wants a router that can take full advantage of the speeds he is paying for. What's the problem with that? Why the fuck shouldn't he want to get what he is paying for?

>We got residential 10GBE symmetrical over here now for ~$50/month
>10GBE
Yeah, no, I don't believe you. Maybe if you live in fucking South Korea or some shit, and their international cables are anemic and can't actually carry that load.

Ah, well. Didn't know that. Probably won't matter for me any time in the next decade or two though because ISPs are such fucking greedy, evil pieces of shit around here and lolmonopolies.

Attached: 1512923513479.jpg (400x267, 32K)

TCP/IP overhead is 5.5% assuming default MTU, so 945mbps is basically as fast as you should ever expect.

>Why anyone buys routers with wireless access points built in
Look at what's available at what price-point and the question becomes why wouldn't I just buy a Wireless Router(tm)? Mine's running dd-wrt in gateway mode with all ports part of the switch (including the "WAN" port). It's not like you have to use a cheap "router" for actual routing (what exactly would it be "routing" anyway, everything goes strait upstream to the ISP who does the actual routing).

You'll have to pay way more for a "Access Point" (which tends to be business type hardware) than you have to pay for a just fine Wireless AC "router" AP.

>2018
>10/100Mbps
why would they sell that museum-tier 1995-type trash today? Gigabit's been around for two decades already and it's already being replaced. Which is good if you want professional gigabit hardware. I actually bought myself two HP Server Quad Gigabit cards off epray for $30 earlier this month.

>1. You can use online banking.
I'm not setting up a fucking WIRE TRANSFER for a some shitty internationally shipped router, I'd just as soon give my credit card number to a Nigerian prince
>2. Who cares who sells it. The hardware matters.
I'd rather not fund that kind of lifestyle, and the hardware is shit, 300mbs is some 2009 tier shit, and its funny how that kind of lifestyle and being bad at your job go hand in hand
>3. The software installation is kinda difficult iirc and requires investing in flashing hardware. It's easier to let minifree do it
Perhaps, but I can always find someone else to do that for me for cheaper and will actually accept payment methods like a normal person
Yeah but I pay for 750mbs down and 10mbs up for $59. Its not that hard man.
The only place i've seen that is Switzerland

>My current Asus is topping out at ~110mbps which I read is a CPU bottleneck issue.
How the fuck? What model is it? I have an AC68U and it does Gbit NAT just fine, CPU load doesn't even hit 50% at peak during a test. I have a D-Link DIR 635 which is positively ancient nowadays and even that was able to do 100Mbps.

Eh, you can barely do a little better on GBE if you get your whole damn infrastructure right (and the ISP's).

VERY diminishing returns. I personally wouldn't bother. Get this thing for $35, install OpenWRT, get cheap 1200mbit sticks and cat6e/cat7 cable if you don't have it already, and you're set up at presumably under $100 in total, while probably mostly saturating what your ISP is willing to provide anyhow.

>Yeah but I pay for 750mbs down and 10mbs up for $59. Its not that hard man.
and my options are $39.99 for 100mbps, or $79.99 for gigabit.

With TV however, gigabit remains at 79.99, and 100mbps goes up to the same 79.99.

Might as well have gigabit, no?

>Yeah, no, I don't believe you.
fiber.salt.ch/en/

CHF isn't tied to USD but it happens to be almost 1:1 at the moment.

>AC68U
I got rid of one of those ~2 years back because it couldn't handle gigabit WAN, unless they've updated the firmware to improve WAN/LAN performance, it was struggling to break 750mbps back when I had it.

OP here. What do I do with one of these? Does it need firmware? What's the likelihood this is a chinese botnet? I think I'm in way over my head here.

amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Edgerouter-Router-Desktop-Black/dp/B0144R449W

amazon.com/Ubiquiti-EdgeRouter-Advanced-Gigabit-Ethernet/dp/B00YFJT29C

Attached: 61noYMEguTL._SL1000_.jpg (1000x1000, 80K)

>getting roped into bundling

Good lord man, just move to somewhere with a better ISP lmao

what the fuck

fuck you guys

Attached: 1532470681129.jpg (882x754, 91K)

based swiss infrastructure

Perhaps some expert in this thread can help me with this: I have a Dlink-DIR880L running dd-wrt. It's a dual-band N/AC router from 2013. It's usually fine.

Every time my worthless NEET brother invites himself and shows up and he connects his ancient Windows 7 laptop to the the router/AP it stops broadcasting SSIDs and stops accepting new wireless connections. Already connected devices keep on working. This happened on the stock firmware before I switched to dd-wrt and it also happens with dd-wrt.

There is never an issue with my laptops or my nephews laptops or tablets of phones. This only happens when that NEET man-child connects his laptop (and probably downloads stuff with bittorrent). What could be the case, and are there any settings I could change?

Attached: neet-anime-girl-with-questionmarks.png (620x640, 260K)

Verizon is a Tier 1 ISP, Verizon provides full bandwidth.


Why the fuck should I move because you erroneously think it's a bad ISP? Verizon is unironically the best large ISP in the nation.

80MB/s on a single torrent with only 4 seeders, i'd say my ISP is performing well above the average.

Attached: 2017-07-15 15_05_12-Deluge.png (927x29, 4K)

apu2 + openbsd + unifi ap ac lite

He is probably paying for the next faster offer than the 100Mbit one.

>Why the fuck shouldn't he want to get what he is paying for?
Mostly because it's too deep in diminishing returns territory. Getting from 910Mbit/s to 960Mbit/s probably costs you more than the internet services for a year and your ISP won't guarantee that as minimum throughput anyhow.

i disagree and you're overlooking other aspects that a better router offers mainly in QoS and bufferbloat performance.

If you have multiple heavy users, that better router is going to perform MUCH better during multiple user operation where you might have 2 or 3 people streaming/gaming at the same time AND someone trying to download torrents at 500mbps+. In order to avoid congestion, a better router is needed.

Yea. Pretty glad people here care to do that shit right [public transit networks and so on are far bigger projects than the fiber rollout, and they also work quite okay].

And the houses that are connected should have faster speeds for a long while (at least 4 optical strands to the premises... I think with current "commodity" non experimental tech that would allow >100Tbit/s, not that anyone is going to provide that right now).

I've had it for over 2 years. It's currently running Asuswrt-Merlin, but it did not perform any worse with the stock FW when I got it. Maybe you configured something wrong or something was broken with the HW NAT acceleration, I remember a while back there was some bug with MAC cloning that I ran into. Mine always did 900+ Mbps, at that point I'm pretty sure I'm hitting the ISP limit.

>And the houses that are connected should have faster speeds for a long while (at least 4 optical strands to the premises... I think with current "commodity" non experimental tech that would allow >100Tbit/s, not that anyone is going to provide that right now).
seems way overkill

My ISP is talking about NG-PON2 upgrades to their existing G-PON infrastructure. That would allow their existing fiber to immediately upgrade to 10gbps each way, and with future upgrade could see 40/40gbps or even 80/80gbps just by replacing the OLTs and ONTs at each end of the fiber.


And this is all on single strand fiber.

Swissfag here too. I'm moving to a new house with fiber connection soon and was interested in Salts offer. Is the sharing aspect of the 10gb ever a problem for you? Has it ever dropped below 1gbps?

I share 2.4gbps down and 1.2gbps up with 16 other households.

I rarely see my speeds drop below 800mbps.

Eh, 2-3 people won't be a big problem. It's a 880Mhz / 256MB RAM beast of a router.

You've been around for the 8MB RAM 100Mbit routers that also worked quite alright for a bunch of hundred connections even before Linux made its QoS shit and such better, right?
And no, QoS between a bunch of users and applications almost always doesn't need any terribly complex scheme.

it's more difficult to QoS 2 people at 20-30mbps and a 3rd at 700mbps all doing shit at the same time.

If you think that's equivalent to 100 users sharing a 100mbps router but all doing tiny 20kb or 100kb tasks, that's not really all that hard to handle.

Faster speeds require more hardware.

It is known that it's more bandwidth than needed. One aspect to it was that they wanted to enable multiple ISPs to offer services, and they might need/prefer "their" actual physical strand of fiber even if another party in the same premise uses another one.

The other aspect was that the cables and installation work doesn't really get THAT much more expensive. Planning for the future, eh.

The shit routers cap out at 700ish mbps if I am lucky. I plug my ethernet right into the modem I go up to 980+ up and down. So far consumer routers are SHIT.

You're correct, but just wait for some Jow Forumsedditor to come tell you how you're wrong and any $50 router can do gigabit because he transfers his media library over LAN at gigabit speeds just fine.

>it's more difficult to QoS 2 people at 20-30mbps and a 3rd at 700mbps all doing shit at the same time.
No, not really. The Linux kernel [which you likely use on a custom ROM] has multiple very adequate methods without the additional ones that certain maintainers might patch into their variant of it. And it's not really getting difficult in most schemes, no.

> Faster speeds require more hardware.
To an extent, sure. But it's not like it's an exponential increase in requirements in most instances or anything. You've got like 50x more hardware than most people had during the old 100Mbit networking age, it'll usually work no problem.

I am paying $50 a month for uncapped gigabit, I fucking want what I am paying for. I sucked enough Cox in my day already suffering with slow 100 mbit 'service'. I am going to get 900+ out my connection even if I have to build my own fucking router.

sorry, but I build my network to handle the loads I expect, and I expect my network to handle outlier situations with ease, so I built my setup to meet this criteria.

Sure, it cost more than the average setup, but I get far more consistent performance, I see bufferbloat go from 400-600ms under load with my ISP provided router, down to 50ms under load with my current box.

I seriously doubt you have the option to get uncapped ~850Mbit instead.

But, if you are worried about 900+ and not accepting around 850, try a Mikrotik hex.

There:
smallnetbuilder.com/lanwan/lanwan-reviews/33140-microtik-rb750gr3-hex-router-reviewed?showall=&start=1

> I expect my network to handle outlier situations with ease, so I built my setup to meet this criteria.
I interpret that to mean you got overspec'd Cisco/Ubiquity/[?] brand gear. Eh, I guess that works.

OTOH while your ISP router may be shit, that does not really mean a Xiaomi 3g or such a rather powerful thing with OpenWRT is doomed to have 400-600ms fucking latencies because of a bit of load from 3-4 clients. It is still not your ISP's crappy hard-and-software AP thing.

>OTOH while your ISP router may be shit
I mean, it's capable of hitting full gigabit speeds on WAN/LAN connections, so it's not pure shit, it just cant handle any sort of QoS at those speeds, as with any QoS enable it basically tanks the speeds down to around 600mbps.

>does not really mean a Xiaomi 3g or such a rather powerful thing with OpenWRT is doomed to have 400-600ms fucking latencies because of a bit of load from 3-4 clients
In my experience that's exactly what he'll see with chink gear or OpenWRT on a gigabit WAN connection.
Consumer gear simply ISN'T built for gigabit, fact.

Cisco 1815 AP paired with a 2911 router

at that price just get a fucking edgerouter lmao

>edgerouter
Unless you're getting one of the nicer ubiquiti routers, they hardly can handle gigabit throughput either.

USG if set up with the bare minimum configuration with no QoS, you can see 900mbps on a good day.

The USG Pro 4 or the EdgeRouter 6P are the bare minimum for reliable gigabit performance.

And then you're dealing with ubiquiti and their data collection user agreement.

>Consumer gear simply ISN'T built for gigabit, fact.
Have some consumer gear tests. Unfortunately no test for the Xiaomi 3G on OpenWRT, but consumer gear regardless:
smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/bar/179-wan-to-lan-tcp/35

I'm again going to guess you bought Cisco or Ubiquity, just because of your attitude... it'd be so friggin' typical.

bump.

Do you put pfsense on this thing or what?

Attached: Ubiquiti-Networks-EdgeRouter-X.3344-2.jpg.png (600x600, 129K)

Now go enable QoS or other non-default settings in any of these sub $100 routers and show me the results again. There might be a few that surprise me, but most wouldn't I've owned several routers on the list.

Attached: 2018-10-30 20_21_12.png (560x1197, 211K)

If you want to use pfsense look into an APU2.

pcengines.ch/apu2.htm

>you're dealing with ubiquiti and their data collection user agreement
How is there no way around this?

If anything you should show me with which settings it didn't work for you and how large the impact was. I really CBA.

>As described in this section, we may automatically collect information when you use the Services ("Usage Data"). The Usage Data that we collect may include information such as your device data, including your mobile devices, sensor data, device signals, device parameters, device identifiers that may uniquely identify your devices, including your mobile device, web request, Internet Protocol address, browser type, browser language, referring/exit pages and URLs, platform type, the date and time of your request, and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify your devices or browser. IN ADDITION, WE MAY AUTOMATICALLY COLLECT LOCATION INFORMATION (INCLUDING LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE), PERFORMANCE DATA, MOTION DATA, TEMPERATURE DATA, POWER USAGE DATA, AND ANY DATA OR SIGNALS COLLECTED BY THE DEVICES AS PART OF THE USAGE DATA. WE DO NOT COLLECT THE CONTENTS OF ANY COMMUNICATIONS THAT PASS THROUGH OUR DEVICES OR SERVICES.


no

Depends on the router, but generally just enabling QoS was enough to get performance to drop by at least 100mbps at the peak. Generally more.

By the by, I run a custom pfSense build with an i5-8250U. 16GB RAM, all loaded on a 60GB SSD.

Ok that looks promising. What else does it need to run? RAM, storage, case, software?

store.netgate.com/SG-3100.aspx