Not officially but it seems to be coping with basic tests, and it's what I had kicking around . I suspect it would fail to cope if I tried to mix the traffic up a bit and increase the packets per second.

M.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

In the RT-N66U case it would be interesting to know if the Tomato or DD-WRT variants fared betted.

The latest RT-N66U firmwares have re-enabled hardware acceleration for PPPoE, as documented in the alternative firmware "Asuswrt-Merlin" at the small net builder forums. This may or may not have much effect however, but generally these boxes have quick CPUs.

Without PPPoE just routing a static IP, I've got one at work on a 100/100 meg leased line, and its been flawless for 10 months now, its connected to our telco supplied Cisco router, as we needed something that we owned to do NAT/DHCP

You should notify Zyxel you have a special one, or maybe there's something wrong with your testing strategy, I can't tell

I thnik even the asus ac68u which asus claim to be the fastest router on the market cant handle 330.

probably can with accelerated NAT.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I thnik even the asus ac68u which asus claim to be the fastest router on the market cant handle 330.

Question is if it could on Sky say (who don't use PPPoE).

probably can with accelerated NAT.

I never know which is the heavier CPU load, NAT or PPPoE encapsulation. I always assumed PPPoE.

I dont think sky's method is signficantly quicker than pppoe. It is still a wan to lan workload.

Edited by Chrysalis (Fri 17-Jan-14 06:01:12)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I dont think sky's method is signficantly quicker than pppoe. It is still a wan to lan workload.

I thought routing packets was always less CPU intensive than creating a new packet, storing the incoming packet in the data field, and adding headers and checksums, and then transmitting. (anything using any type of PPP).

BT finished installing Fibre at parents house on Wednesday, they are coming to do activation and install fibre ONT on 24th.

but wont be getting the full 330/30 did not go for infinity 4 went for infinity 2.

its FTTP fed via OH cable.

Not happy as im stuck on an EO line at my house.

My parents have also recently had FTTP installed (in fact I think it is in the same FTTP area as MartinS).

They've only gone for the 160/20 option, but for me the problem with this tech is distributing the max speeds it offers around the house. It's a fairly big house, and even using "ac" wireless (my own equipment + BT Home Hub 5 in exclusive 5GHz "ac" mode) I can only get ~90 megabits on the middle level and ~60 megabits on the top level.

Powerline networking has proved equally poor, with the latest "Homeplug AV2" compatible models only offering max 60 megabits of throughput to any other socket.

Not that my parents care much, but if it was my property I'd have to look for a professional contractor to install Ethernet all over the place. Since I'm stuck on an EO line myself with no prospect of increased speeds for years tweaking their crazy connection is as close as I'll get to having one.

if you want performance go gigabit ethernet.

powerline is a poor man's solution and can also cause interference.

wireless is a conveniance solution but will perform worse than ethernet. Granted ac is pretty good tho. In my opinion anyone who thinks powerline networking is "good enough" for their needs are better off just using ac as that can outperform powerline networking anyway.