TP-Link TLER5120 Router

Edited by deleted (Mon 18-Aug-14 11:50:43)

What size did you expect?

Rack mountable would suggest it is going to be 440mm wide and 1U (44mm) high.

The spec suggests it will consume a max of 60w. From the spec: 100-240V~ 50/60Hz 0.6A so max current at lowest voltage 0.6X100 >> 60w. That will be when everything is working flat out - idle it will be a lot less.

Routers can be big too, especially if space for upgradeable memory and other options

Edited by deleted (Mon 18-Aug-14 13:43:35)

Edited by deleted (Mon 18-Aug-14 17:00:43)

You may need it for HTTPS traffic, etc. http://uk.tp-link.com/article/?id=150

What are you using to get the bonding for the downstream? How are you testing the downstream bonding?

The problem is you are only controlling one direction of the traffic with the local router and so to get the fine line speed downstream you would need multiple threads that are taking different routes. If it is a single thread or all threads are taking the same route then you will not max it out.

Can the router show you stats as to which route is being used. It is also possible that it is prioritising the Virgin route due to better line metrics.

I was also following a thread on this on another forum before it got closed

I was looking at this too, but was put off when I saw a picture of the size mounted in a rack, it's a bit big for the space where all my equipment is.

@OP I assume you've tried doing a multithreaded speedtest (thinkbroadband one) or a download that utilizes multiple connection, usenet for example?

Edited by deleted (Tue 19-Aug-14 12:52:27)

Sorry, so you are getting the expected throughput? Your previous post said you weren't getting the speeds you expected but your latest says you are. I only made the suggestions as I thought you weren't getting the speeds - I must have misunderstood.

Edited by deleted (Tue 19-Aug-14 13:40:52)

I post in this section occasionally!

The router CPU might be what's bottlenecking you.

Amber light on Openreach modem port is correct - those only have 100Mb ports.

I don't use application load balancing. Flows tend to stick to ports anyway.

Mine works okay but will be getting retired at some point in the not too hugely distant future.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

You may need it for HTTPS traffic, etc. http://uk.tp-link.com/article/?id=150

Flow control isn't related to this article, flow control works at Ethernet layer.

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

I appreciate you doing so! - thanks!

CPU says 3% usage but that never changes - if that's what you mean.?

Yes - mine runs pretty hot at times, however you may have version 2 of the hardware while I have version 1.

PPPoE takes its toll on the device.

By running hot I meant running high on CPU, not temperature that seems fine.

The device has been running just fine, it's pretty stable. I won't be retiring it due to the device but because I no longer need it. The device itself works perfectly well.

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

Sorry to bother you again Carl,

Some people are saying that I could end up contending myself with another line or 2. Is this because of it all running off the same pair(s)?

Do you find any problems running 2?

Thanks

Pete

You contend with yourself in the same way you contend with other people, there's nothing special about having 2 lines, you just happen to have 2 lines into the same place rather than one here and one next door. The contention points are cabinet to exchange/handover point and from there onwards on the service provider's network. That you have multiple lines is irrelevant to this.

Neither line shares the same pair, there's a 2 pair drop cable into the house, each of the 2 FTTC lines uses a pair. They can't share pairs, things would go very wrong!

Edited by deleted (Thu 21-Aug-14 23:30:35)

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

I see, thanks for explaining.

Someone else suggested that I get separate providers so to give more redundancy. I really can't afford downtime which is why I have the FTTC line as well.

I spent years at Plusnet telling people if they were serious they should have a backup. I can hardly go against that. also It's well within the "burn" for my 2014 budget.

Based on the assumption the VM FTTP would never get here i really could do with having 2 more -

Sorry forgot to ask - will this unit take a potential 311 down?

My version 1 hardware will not, your mileage on your version 2 may vary however I doubt it if there are multiple PPPoE connections involved.

Wireless access point ?

Edited by deleted (Mon 01-Sep-14 20:57:38)

Plenty of routers can be reconfigured as a wireless access point all they need is Ethernet input to a LAN port and setting up like in the example at http://www.coolwebhome.co.uk/wap/configuring-wap.html

Plus you also gain some extra Ethernet ports. So yes with a little tweaking the old PN router should work for this purpose.

Principles are the same

Bridge might work but usually follow what I detailed and it works