Major difference between WRT300N & WRVS4400N

Hi,

I'm a newbie to wireless networking. I want to buy a pair of routers connecting my two sites (called them site A & site B).

At site A, I have two P4 class PCs & one PII PC. I used the 2 P4 PCs to browse internet. The PII PC had P2P application running continuously. I would like to put the PII PC in DMZ. The site connected to internet via

10Mbps link.

At site B, I have one PII PC also running P2P application running continuously. I intend to add one P4 PC running web cam services. I intend to put PII PC in DMZ. The site connected to internet via 10Mbps link

Most time I will stay at site A and need to access site B computers via VPN channels. I would like to share site A & site B's internet connections via Linksys routers and install wireless LAN adapters in the three P4 PCs.

I found WRT300N & WRVS4400N model may suit my needs. However, from the user guide found at Linksys web site, I saw no significant difference in their functionality and supported features --- I mean in 802.11x standard support, firewall & VPN functionality and intrusion prevention system support.

I would like to ask besides authentication & IP versions support, what are the major difference between models ? Do these models suit my requirement ?

Also, I found no figure stated in user guides or specification sheets telling how many wireless device could access the router at maximum ?

Besides, specification of both router models support draft 802.11n, does it mean that 802.11n standard is not finalized yet ? Thanks for help :)

Reply to
goo_lu
Loading thread data ...

Hi

Since you do VPN and the WRVS4400N is a VPN End Point, the WRVS4400N is probably more suitable.

Jack (MVP-Networking).

Reply to
Jack (MVP-Networking).

On 14 Nov 2006 13:29:49 -0800, "goo_lu" wrote in :

What you probably want is a point-to-point wireless bridge.

Be warned that P2P will cause some cheap routers to fall over and die due to large numbers of connections.

Be warned that the DMZ in most low-end routers *isn't* a true DMZ -- it's a horribly misnamed security hole!

Correct.

Reply to
John Navas

John Navas =BCg=B9D=A1G

Will a wireless router be a more suitable choice in terms of future extendability ?

Did mentioned Linksys models fall into your categorized "cheap" routers ?

Did mentioned Linksys models fall into your categorized "low-end" routers ? If so, how about Belkin's products ?

Reply to
goo_lu

On 14 Nov 2006 14:12:53 -0800, "goo_lu" wrote in :

Depends on what you'll want to do.

Most low-end wireless routers cannot be used on the client side of a wireless bridge.

Cheap is under $100.

Worse than Linksys.

Reply to
John Navas

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.