Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router
-
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I can say that I've pushed Ubiquiti's lowest model EdgeMax, the ERX, pretty far for what it is in regards to throughput, VPN, hosting services behind it, etc.
It just laughed at me and kept going.
The ER-X actually has a better processor than the ERL
Yeah, those things are beasts.
The only problem I ever had with and ER-X was that one time, it just locked up and I couldnt see what was causing the problem because there was no console port. I had to break out the paper clip. But that device is still running at my office, as well as my house, and 2 other businesses.
However after that incident, I started going with the ER-lite.
-
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I have a site with 80ish devices (servers, computers, VoIP) on the LAN plus 20-30 devices on WiFi all running through an ER-PoE with no issues at all.
edit: Said site has a 100/100 fiber and my weekly report generally shows 10% average usage.
10% of the bandwidth is the average usage?
-
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I can say that I've pushed Ubiquiti's lowest model EdgeMax, the ERX, pretty far for what it is in regards to throughput, VPN, hosting services behind it, etc.
It just laughed at me and kept going.
The ER-X actually has a better processor than the ERL
It's newer, not surprised.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I can say that I've pushed Ubiquiti's lowest model EdgeMax, the ERX, pretty far for what it is in regards to throughput, VPN, hosting services behind it, etc.
It just laughed at me and kept going.
The ER-X actually has a better processor than the ERL
Yeah, those things are beasts.
The only problem I ever had with and ER-X was that one time, it just locked up and I couldnt see what was causing the problem because there was no console port. I had to break out the paper clip. But that device is still running at my office, as well as my house, and 2 other businesses.
However after that incident, I started going with the ER-lite.
Lack of a console port really sucks on ER-X for certain, but it is designed to be disposable. Just keep a spare and backup the config regularly. Replace as needed.
-
@JaredBusch You bet. I have one sitting on my shelf at all times.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch You bet. I have one sitting on my shelf at all times.
Yeah - for $50, who wouldn't?
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch You bet. I have one sitting on my shelf at all times.
For those that don't care about RMA, you can open them and get a serial connection because it has a 4 pin connector with Vcc 3.3v, Tx, Rx, Grnd.
There are posts on the UBNT forum about recovering a bricked ER-X, but nothing consolidated or 'official'.
-
@JaredBusch Yeah, I saw that over on the UBNT forums. I'd do that for my house, but that's about it.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
Never. User count is never a factor in networking. That's only something that consumer networking vendors use as a guide to sell products to non-IT people who don't know about things like bandwidth, latency and traffic types. You move up to the ER-8 based on technical needs only.
At such a tiny company, very likely you are barely even looking at the ERL. Chances are, the ER-X is plenty.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
Never. User count is never a factor in networking. That's only something that consumer networking vendors use as a guide to sell products to non-IT people who don't know about things like bandwidth, latency and traffic types. You move up to the ER-8 based on technical needs only.
At such a tiny company, very likely you are barely even looking at the ERL. Chances are, the ER-X is plenty.
Yes, exactly. The ER-X can forward around 500mbps but only provides PoE with a single passthrough port. If the WAN connection is at or over 500mbps or you want to run multiple AP via PoE, then it's time to start looking at something else.
Which reminds me, I need to pickup a PoE to USB adapter for my house, 1 wire to run the rPi, yay.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
Never. User count is never a factor in networking. That's only something that consumer networking vendors use as a guide to sell products to non-IT people who don't know about things like bandwidth, latency and traffic types. You move up to the ER-8 based on technical needs only.
At such a tiny company, very likely you are barely even looking at the ERL. Chances are, the ER-X is plenty.
Agreed. Although I prefer the ERL is preferred over the ERX mainly due to the console port access. However, as @JaredBusch mentioned earlier, the ERX has more processing power, so there is a trade off I suppose.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
That type of thinking breaks one of Scott's rules... don't buy for tomorrow.
Of course, considering the very small additional investment to go to the next level, if that other option even has the possibility of happening, the billing time to install it could be more than the device, but then again, if you're sticking to UBNT stuff, the config will probably just copy over, so even upgrading should only be one hour of time... so time value of money and all.. it's a very close call either way you go.
-
@Dashrender said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
That type of thinking breaks one of Scott's rules... don't buy for tomorrow.
That's right. Spending $300 today when only $95 is needed is pretty big.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money.
Just tell them that they might need to spend it later and explain why you are saving them money today.
-
@Dashrender said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
That type of thinking breaks one of Scott's rules... don't buy for tomorrow.
Of course, considering the very small additional investment to go to the next level, if that other option even has the possibility of happening, the billing time to install it could be more than the device, but then again, if you're sticking to UBNT stuff, the config will probably just copy over, so even upgrading should only be one hour of time... so time value of money and all.. it's a very close call either way you go.
Right, but that's why I mentioned the only concern being going back to the client later and asking for more time/money. Depending how fast that would happen, it could be perceived by the client as you not knowing how to properly spec what was needed. Clients expect you to provide them what they need and future proof a bit for them.
In the end, as a general rule, I always try and "read' the customer. Trying to guess how they will react when presented with proposals, or how they will potentially respond when asked to spend more money later, is a total judgement call. Some people won't care either way. I like those clients.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money.
Just tell them that they might need to spend it later and explain why you are saving them money today.
You posted too quick. Exactly my plan after this discussion.
-
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@Dashrender said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
That type of thinking breaks one of Scott's rules... don't buy for tomorrow.
Of course, considering the very small additional investment to go to the next level, if that other option even has the possibility of happening, the billing time to install it could be more than the device, but then again, if you're sticking to UBNT stuff, the config will probably just copy over, so even upgrading should only be one hour of time... so time value of money and all.. it's a very close call either way you go.
Right, but that's why I mentioned the only concern being going back to the client later and asking for more time/money. Depending how fast that would happen, it could be perceived by the client as you not knowing how to properly spec what was needed. Clients expect you to provide them what they need and future proof a bit for them.
In the end, as a general rule, I always try and "read' the customer. Trying to guess how they will react when presented with proposals, or how they will potentially respond when asked to spend more money later, is a total judgement call. Some people won't care either way. I like those clients.
If, during your talks, you get the impression of explosive growth that would make a need for a larger firewall, then you make it their call. Present both option explain why you recommend the lesser one, but then let them decide. Problem solved.
-
@Dashrender said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@Dashrender said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@scottalanmiller said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@JaredBusch said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
@fuznutz04 said in Edge Router Lite vs Edge Router:
I've been recommending and installing the ER-Lite routers for small office deployments with zero problems. But these deployments were always for about 20-25 users. At what point (user count) would we recommend going to the next model up, the Edge Router (ER-8)
In this specific scenario, I am looking at a 70 person office.
It really just comes down to traffic.
How much are the users actually doing that traverses the WAN will affect how much the router will be processing.
I use the ER PoE for a main office scenario, just because I am lazy and like having the switch chip and built in PoE for any wireless gear.
At this point, so much is unknown. This is more of a general question to "get in the ballpark" They will have at least 70 PCs, 70 VoIP phones going to a cloud PBX. I don't know about onsite services or anything else at the moment.
Then don't spend extra without a need. Get the ERL and buy more capacity down the road if a need is warranted.
Yep. The only reason that I can think of to put ther ER-8 in now would be so that you don't have to go back to the client later and ask them to spend more money. The fact that the cost difference is so small, is the only reason I would question it at all. It's not like the old days where asking a customer to step up to the next model was a big investment.
With that being said, I agree 100%, to only install what you need at that point and for the foreseeable future.
That type of thinking breaks one of Scott's rules... don't buy for tomorrow.
Of course, considering the very small additional investment to go to the next level, if that other option even has the possibility of happening, the billing time to install it could be more than the device, but then again, if you're sticking to UBNT stuff, the config will probably just copy over, so even upgrading should only be one hour of time... so time value of money and all.. it's a very close call either way you go.
Right, but that's why I mentioned the only concern being going back to the client later and asking for more time/money. Depending how fast that would happen, it could be perceived by the client as you not knowing how to properly spec what was needed. Clients expect you to provide them what they need and future proof a bit for them.
In the end, as a general rule, I always try and "read' the customer. Trying to guess how they will react when presented with proposals, or how they will potentially respond when asked to spend more money later, is a total judgement call. Some people won't care either way. I like those clients.
If, during your talks, you get the impression of explosive growth that would make a need for a larger firewall, then you make it their call. Present both option explain why you recommend the lesser one, but then let them decide. Problem solved.
True story. We're on the same page.
