In article , wrote: :Sorry, it is my mistake, Actually I am looking for SOHO market (Home :office). if I have one Broadband connection, in a Small office/Home :office I would like to connect all 10 or 12 computers and printer in :Local area Networ, I am looking for 8/16 port switchs, which should :have FE ports with auto-detection.
Okay, managed or unmanaged? Load requirements? Security features? Any QoS requirements?
:Also I am lloking some products which should supprt load balancing, for :eaxmple in Internet cafe lot of computers shoudl connected to Internet.
That sounds like a separate requirement, possibly with a different number of ports and possibly with the addition of an uplink port; also, in such a situation, reliability or redundancy become important. [An Internet Cafe that is down with network problems loses it's main excuse for serving mediocre food...]
Is it actually "load balancing" you are looking for, or is it "rate shaping" ? Load balancing refers to distributing load to resources equally, such as might be required if you provided application services (e.g., gaming) or if you had a cluster of servers that were acting as http cache servers for the user hosts. "Rate shaping" would be used if you want certain bandwidths per port, or if you want to restrict the actual network draw against your WAN connection [e.g., if you pay by peak access rate.] "Rate shaping" usually implies buffering and stuffing in packets as soon as there is a chance to do so. There is also Policing, another form of QoS, in which packets beyond a certain rate are simply dropped -- which is not supposed to matter for UDP, and triggers TCP congestion-control algorithms to slow down TCP.
Within policing and rate-shaping, an important factor is the level you wish to police or shape at. Per-port is fair common, and per-vlan is perhaps the next most common. If you want to go down to per-application (e.g., allow full rate to http traffic but restrict KaZaa rates) then your choices become much more limited and much more expensive. Part of the difficulty there is that one can no longer assume that a certain port corresponds to a certain application: many of the P2P programs are able to fall back to using port 80 (normally http) in order to bypass firewalls or rate controls.
In the Internet Cafe environment, security also becomes more important: users will not want other users to be able to spy on them or control their sessions or whatever. And you want to prevent viruses, trojans and other kinds of malware from using your LAN as an avenue to spread between the various systems (especially if you are offering wireless access to user-provided systems.)
When your business is at stake, it is ultimately self-defeating to go for the "cheapest" router: if you are earning (say) $50/hour in access fees then having your network down for a day while the wait-staff tries to debug the problem is going to chew through your profits, losing you easily $500 in a day. When you have a LAN that fools and borderline sociopaths are going to have access to, you need your networking equipment to be tough instead of cheap.