Turn it off then and use your own APs, it’s what I do in my home. I don’t have this specific router but I have a box with 2 eth ports, one goes to pppoe and the other to my home switch, where my APs are connected.

You can hook it to a switch and a Wireless AP… Now your networking is modular.

This is link to CZ.NIC’s Turris offerings.

They ship to “many countries” besides Czech republic, according to their page.

The router itself is quite expensive at around 400 euros for the wifi model.

In case it is not obvious, they are primarily Czech domain registrar.

1GB

Packet loss occurs when a router has to drop some packets because the buffer to store them is running out because the link where they are supposed to go is overloaded.

Bufferbloat is the issue where you make your queues too deep, i.e. you allocate too much RAM to buffering, while the cause of the buffering still exists, so the deeper queue just fills up anyway, so you haven’t improved anything, and have induced extra latency on the packets that do make it trough.

Deep buffers can help in situations where you have a step down in link speed, but only bursty and not sustained overloading of the slower output link.

The big bottleneck in router hardware is more about TCAM or HBM memory used to store the FIB of the global routing table. Since the table has grown so much the devices with less high speed memory can’t hold the table anymore, and if they start swapping the FIB to normal memory your routing performance goes to shit.

So not all of your concerns seem to apply to this class of device, but of course you’re right, The Register should have mentioned the RAM.

I’m fine with the looks and hardware, except I’m not upgrading again for a wifi 6 router. I’ll wait till they make a 7. 7 has a couple pretty big improvements over 6.

I was thinking the same thing, because I want either Wi-Fi 6E or Wi-Fi 7, as I currently have Wi-Fi 5, and it works well enough.

It’s $90 and for if you want a wifi router. What are you missing?

Thank you for your sacrifice.

Which router did you go for, by the way?

You want your $90 wi-fi router to do what now?

most likely because this device is mainly for wifi use, and/or limitation of the SoC.

I can’t tell if WAN is Wireless Area Network or Wide Area Network.

Nerd here. You confuse me:

WAN is some up-/downstream port connecting intranets remotely in my novice book. The measurement G doesn’t refer to some advertisement-thingy in terms of wireless speed (but Gigabyte) - Maybe it’s some form of Generation; But then I lack everything including my false base knowledge. Additionally I have never encountered “2.5G LAN” ever before: Would you be able to shed light on my shortcomings? 2.5 x 8 is 20 Gbit. I didn’t read about that size yet.

Edit: Thanks guys!

Given the 2.5Gb port also supports PoE in, I think the idea is that you can plug this into a 2.5Gb PoE port on a seperate managed switch and that’s the only connection you need; that’s certainly how I would use it. WAN connections could be plugged into that switch, along with the APs, user devices, servers, etc, with them seperated using VLANs. Assuming everything was gigabit except for that 2.5Gb link to the OpenWRT Thing™, you’d be hard-pressed to saturate that 2.5Gb port and you’d still have the gigabit port completely free for… whatever.

It’s Open source hardware too

deleted by creator

Well it’s cheaper, so I’m not sure it’s going for “better”.

Most of those run OpenWrt or PfSense. Assuming the hardware is well-supported by the open source software it runs, there’s a argument to be made that there’s no difference. There’s always the risk of them using some weird chipset that won’t be supported in a year’s time. The only difference is that the OpenWrt One is specifically designed for OpenWrt with well-supported hardware.

WiFi