Broadband Router Comparisons
larrysheldon at cox.net
Mon Dec 28 03:32:50 UTC 2015
On 12/27/2015 19:56, Mike wrote:
> On 12/27/15, 4:57 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>> On 12/26/2015 23:49, Mike wrote:
>>> Firstly, they are all junk. Every last one of them. Period. Broadband
>>> routers are designed to be cheap and to appeal to people who don't know
>>> any better, and who respond well (eg: make purchasing decisions) based
>>> on the shape of the plastic, the color scheme employed, and number of
>>> mysterious blinking lights that convey 'something important is
>>> happening'. Further, the price point is $45 - $70 thereabouts, putting
>>> some definite constraints on the actual quality of the engineering and
>>> components that go into them. I feel that we, the service provider,
>>> endure a significantly high and undue burden of cost associated with
>>> providing ongoing support to customers as a result of the defects
>>> contained therein.
>> Why don't you offer an acceptable (to you) device at a price
>> acceptable to me as a part of the service. I'd buy it.
> NO SUCH DEVICE EXISTS, because you can't afford it. If I were to take
> you seriously however - and we're talking about eliminating all excuses
> and simply getting down to it and making a marginally qualified showing
> at expecting uninterrupted service - the entire environment is what has
> to be solved. The device would be cisco or juniper branded, internal
> redundancy / failover features to allow hitless upgrades or module
> failures, have dual (preferably, triple) power supplies, would be
> required to be housed in a locked enclosure with air conditioning and
> online double conversion battery with the addition of an external backup
> generator with its own separate backup fuel supply, which is further
> tested weekly and mantained with inspections and oil changes. The router
> would be under service contract with the manufacturer, would be
> monitoring by my noc, and would receive appropriate software upgrades as
> required, and you would pay for this monthly in addition to your
> internet service. Furthermore, you also would be required to have at
> least two distinct connections to me and make a deposit to provide
> credit in the event you falsely claim 'trouble' where no trouble exists.
> A seperate 'test pc', also in it's own enclosure and normally offlimits
> to you, and connected to said router and backup power and such, would be
> agreed upon as the test fixture that we would monitor TO. It would
> display current network statistics including packet loss and latencies
> to various on and off-net locations, with current time and date logging
> on screen. You would agree that you are to blame each and every time you
> 'can't get on', while the test pc clearly shows on it's local screen to
> you otherwise. You would be required to forfeit a portion of your
> deposit each time you called for technical support and were determined
> to be at fault and to blame for your own issue.
I'll accept the challenge and try to be briefer.
If it can't be did at a price I'll accept, then let us stop crying about
how bad it is. You don't like it, turn it off.
(For the record, I do not require all of that stuff--if I am "grid off"
then having a standby power system would be nice to power our CPAPs, but
commo is going to be down and it might as well be dark and quiet.)
And for the matter of "false" failure reports--there IS a work around
for you: From Day ONE, Hour Zero, Minute Zero, Second Zero, supply
stuff that WORKS the way your sales people said it would.
If you start out peddling crap that does not work, you will establish
yourself as a peddler of crap and the first place to call.
I used to work for a company that did a pretty good job of doing that so
when somebody did call they often sounded apologetic and tended to need
to be convinced that, no this one is ours, but we are on it and we hope
to be back at HH:MM.
For people that purchased large quantities of what we sold we provided
alarm displays or ring downs to tell THEM we broke something.
sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal)
More information about the NANOG