Reason I ask is that it’s the only way I can see to get a decent caching system working on a 400-series Routerboard.
I know that I can use an RB600 or RB1000, but these don’t support MetaRouter to the best of my knowledge. The above would represent a cheap way around the problem.
So should it work, and would it work with reasonable speed?
I know, but CF is far better suited to this task – I’d like wirespeed writes to the chosen media at up to 100Mbps. In theory a uSD should manage it but in practice the extra CPU requirements would swamp the system surely?
And in any case, there’s no way a $15 8GB uSD card is going to be as durable in terms of rewrite cycles as a $100 SLC-based CF card.
… which have no support for virtualisation. The RB1000 will have shortly, that is fair enough, but I was hoping not to have to pay $800 for these boxes
We are currently using RB433UAH’s and an RB600 for testing and development, and have a few production links running with these boards.
These are not really suitable for the deployment scenarios we want, due to the use of micro-SD, the layout and the low number of mini-pci slots. We are waiting for the RB616 until we put our new network in to prodction.
I suspect the reason the 600 does not support Metarouter is the lack of memory. In my opinion something is needed between the 600 and the 1000 to fill in a few gaps.
I think we’d be happy to pay $500 for a board that had CF slots, similar memory to the 450G or 433UAH, gig ports (3 or more) and virtualisation. Preferably packaged like the 750.
This would be the kind of mid-range firewall device that I think a lot of companies would kill for quite honestly.
6 = PowerPC architechture
1 = One ethernet port
6 = 6 mini-pci slots
Which makes for a perfect High Power access point, two backhaul links and 360 degree coverage from 90degree sectors. I just want it to have enough CPU power and memory to handle that number of wireless cards, MPLS and PPPoE .