Since today we are comparing the use of software routers and hardware broadband routers for broadband access, we need to focus our main comparison on these aspects. By understanding this, we can have a clear perspective when making the comparison.
We divide the functional comparison into essential functions and additional functions. Essential functions refer to those necessary for small and medium-sized enterprise network access clients, while additional functions refer to those not needed or only temporarily needed in this context. A very clear example is the Cisco routers we frequently encounter, which have powerful and comprehensive features, right? However, if I buy a Cisco router purely for broadband access, then features like dynamic routing protocols (IGRP, OSPF, EIGRP), 802.1x, RADIUS, broadband dialing, ISDN support, IS-IS support, BGP support, etc., are basically useless for pure network access applications.
The functions mentioned above are what we refer to as additional functions. These are not required by the current testing environment, so we must exclude them when making comparisons.
The following key functions are indispensable:
1. Ease of Configuration. In this aspect, hardware broadband routers win completely. RouterOS has numerous and complex configuration parameters, with an entirely English configuration interface that is far beyond the capability of an average user. Even professional technicians need to refer to the configuration manual when setting up a software router. Even with the manual’s help, they cannot fully master it and can only continuously test and explore on their own. However, hardware broadband routers are very user-friendly in this regard, with a simple, clear, all-Chinese configuration interface, a comfortable layout, and straightforward functionality that allows an average user to get started easily. Here, hardware broadband routers win completely.
2. NAT Functionality. NAT is the most fundamental and core function of a broadband router. Without enabling NAT, it cannot be called a broadband router. Although the NAT function is designed to be the same across different products, the quality of software design directly affects NAT efficiency and router performance. The router’s throughput when NAT is enabled is a standard for measuring router performance.
Additionally, whether NAT functionality is comprehensive is also a standard for judging whether a product is relatively mature. For example, does your router support one-to-one NAT translation and how many pairings does it support? Does it support more flexible NAT port mapping (forwarding)? Does it support multiple NAT? Does it support time-scheduled NAT opening, etc.? In this functional comparison, hardware broadband routers and software routers are on par;
However, in terms of functionality, RouterOS is more powerful. But this power leads directly to configuration complexity, and its NAT functions delve too deeply into the internal structure of data packets, with overly granular controllable parameters. If all its various NAT control functions are fully enabled, its forwarding performance will definitely be severely affected. Considering the balance in this aspect, RouterOS wins.
3. Internal Network Control Functions. This comparison is relatively straightforward. In terms of policies (access lists), the main comparison is whether internal network control can be effectively performed. For example, common applications like: allowing users within a certain range to access specific IP addresses or ports on the external network during a specific time period, or allowing a specific IP address to access the internet through the router, etc. In this aspect, hardware broadband routers rely on their web-based management interface and command-line generic policy controls, achieving functions that are matched closely by software routers, neither clearly superior.
Software routers have many controllable parameters, but hardware broadband routers have even more controllable parameters under their generic policy, and they control them in a simpler and more intuitive way. In other internal network control aspects, both hardware broadband and software routers support IP/MAC binding, port mirroring, and Port VLAN functions. It’s worth mentioning here that hardware broadband routers support internal network ARP attack prevention. By enabling this ARP attack prevention option, internal network ARP attacks can be effectively prevented. This option was not found on the software router. After comprehensive consideration, hardware broadband routers win in this aspect.
4. Bandwidth Control Functions. In terms of bandwidth control, both routers have their own characteristics. The hardware broadband router’s feature is a bandwidth control method based on the CBT bandwidth control algorithm. This type of bandwidth control algorithm is similar to bank lending principles; its biggest characteristic is that bandwidth can fluctuate. Conserve and be rewarded, overuse and be penalized, to ensure applications function within effective bandwidth;
The software router’s bandwidth control can be based on groups or individual PCs to limit a