Best reasons to use NETGATE 2100 vs. Ubiquiti EdgeRouter 4 ?
-
With comcast (cable, not fibre :<) and starlink, what are the compelling reasons to use negate rather than ubiquiti? I don’t mind CLI configuration tools … my key concerns are reliable failover and functionality of load balancing (e.g. will load balancing screw up Apple airdrop and friends).
-
@khb The EdgeRouter series are old and receiving only minimal support anymore from Ubiquiti. I'd be nervous about continuing to use one in a security-exposed situation, like a frontline router. Also, while I'm not sure about the speed of the ER-4 in particular, I know that the ER-X units I have struggle to keep up with Gbps speeds. I recently switched to Netgate from the ER-X, and I'm quite glad I did. I don't use load balancing so I can't speak to that feature in particular.
-
@tgl
None of the available ISPs are anywhere near Gpbs (350down and less than half that up are more likely). Your point about the Ubiquiti products is well taken, perhaps I should have compared with the ER-X or one of their other lines … but load balancing and/or failover features/bugs are apt to be day to day deal breakers moreso than Gbps peak issues. -
@khb said in Best reasons to use NETGATE 2100 vs. Ubiquiti EdgeRouter 4 ?:
None of the available ISPs are anywhere near Gpbs (350down and less than half that up are more likely).
OK, so speed not a problem. (But that also means that even a Netgate 2100 might be overkill for you -- have you looked at the 1100?) I still feel queasy about Ubiquiti's commitment to that product line though. It's been four years since the last full firmware release, more than a year since the last security hotfix, and when did you last see a new product announcement in that line? The writing on the wall is pretty plain.
-
@khb said in Best reasons to use NETGATE 2100 vs. Ubiquiti EdgeRouter 4 ?:
@tgl
but load balancing and/or failover features/bugs are apt to be day to day deal breakers moreso than Gbps peak issues.I doubt you would find any bugs that would screw things up since this is functionality that has been around for ages. Settings is another story but I suspect that would be on you then... Although I don't know what could mess up Airdrop or any other things for that matter. To be honest, I'd probably blame Apple for not playing nice if something went wrong there...
I have been using failover for a long time and did a lot of testing when setting it up to ensure it would work as expected. Which it has the two times my fiber has gone down in the past two or three years...
I am not using load balancing since my failover connection is metered LTE, but I wouldn't expect any issues with that either. Load balancing is essentially the same setup, only with the same Tier on both connections.
-
@khb said in Best reasons to use NETGATE 2100 vs. Ubiquiti EdgeRouter 4 ?:
@tgl
None of the available ISPs are anywhere near Gpbs (350down and less than half that up are more likely). Your point about the Ubiquiti products is well taken, perhaps I should have compared with the ER-X or one of their other lines … but load balancing and/or failover features/bugs are apt to be day to day deal breakers moreso than Gbps peak issues.In full disclosure the 2100 does not handle Gbit either. It does about 540Mbps at peak datarate (large packets in few sessions) when firewall and NAT is engaged. If you start installing Snort/Suricata for deep inspection that number will drop to half depending on rule count and config.
You should not consider the 1100 in my opinion. It's not really a good product for failover type installations because it only has one builtin NIC (The 3 ports are on a switch), so the VLAN "juggling" to create proper failover scenarios becomes complicated, and performance is not nearly as good as the 2100 even through they have the same CPU. The extra NIC makes a real difference!
Also 1Gb RAM in the 1100 Is starting to become cramped unless you really simplify your config og services. -
@khb But to answer your question. You should use the 2100 because of the superior feature set and support that comes with it compared to Edgerouter 4. Not to mention pfBlockerNG and so on.
