Netgear FSV318v3 firewall drastically slows down my connection

Except that the Netgear does what it's spec'd to do. Why did you not understand that you need to read the through-put specs on any firewall to determine if it's going to meet your needs.

Before you make another choice, read the detailed specs to see what the throughput rating is, and it's not the port speed, it's listed in the specs.

The WAN port supports 100 Mbps because a) 10/100 NICS are cheap as dirt, and b) 11.5 is bigger than 10.

If they advertise a WAN port that supports a physical 100Mbs connection, it's not unreasonable to assume that the connection speed should be more than 5 or 6 Mbs, don't you think? D

--->I wouldn't slam them too hard. It's advertised as a broadband router. For the vast majority, broadband means 1.5 or maybe 3 Mbps. Connections like your's are a relatively new phenomenon on the market. I only wish I had your problem. (He says from behind a 512K satellite link...)

Thanks - I will add them to my list - the other companies that I know of are Cisco (probably too expensive) and SonicWall. D

-->I got rid of my Netgear and got a Check Point product (500 W UTM), which I'm very pleased with. I can't say that it will handle your 30 Mbps band-width, but you can check their web-site for details.

I'm using (right now) Google Groups --- blame them, not me, please! I normally use the news reader in Outlook Express but I'm currently connecting from a Linux box and I've never found a decent newsreader in Linux that I liked :-)

--->You really need to get a Usenet client that properly quotes people, you're sucks (forgive the wording).

See my response from "Sat, Mar 25 2006 10:46 pm" where I indicated quite clearly (I thought) that the MTU was set to 1500 everywhere.

--->If you didn't adjust the MTU setting, while is in the instructions, then you might not be getting what you need - you also didn't say if you adjusted it or not in your reply.

Don't be condescending. I already pointed out that although the feature was enabled, there were no actual keywords to test against. Even if there were, this should not cause 20% degradation in throughput - think about how the algorithm should be working - if it's set to block a particular website, then it's going to check the OUTGOING http request for a match --- that shouldn't have ANY significant impact on the speed of the INCOMING data.

--->As for bad software, consider this, any time you enable a filtering feature it has to execute SOME code, that code takes CPU Time (you do understand that the device has some form of CPU, right?), and that means it will decrease performance for other things.

Because it never occured to me that I'd have to worry about this kind of degradation - I didn't go to vendor sites - I went to a store and bought a device that claimed to support a 100Mbs WAN port - it seemed reasonable to assume that I'd get at least 20 or 25 Mbs out of it. 5 or 6Mbs isn't even CLOSE to reasonable.

--->Why the heck would you assume anything - the specs are right on the vendors site, please learn to read them before you make another mistake.

Understood - but even the cheap sonicwall boxes are claiming at least

60Mbs throughput and they're not that much more expensive than the Netgear devices.

--->Firewalls don't process at wire speed, they have a defined rate that they can process traffic at, it's been that way for ages.

No it doesn't - it claims 11Mbs and only delivers 5-6Mbs....more relevently, that information is not on the box (no surprise, I suppose)

--->Except that the Netgear does what it's spec'd to do.

One doesn't always have time to sit down and research the entire firewall market. My assumptions seemed reasonable - I suspect a lot of people will fall into a similar trap - in the worst case, this newsgroup thread will be helpful to others.

--->Why did you not understand that you need to read the through-put specs on any firewall to determine if it's going to meet your needs.

Obviously - now that I know!

--->Before you make another choice, read the detailed specs to see what the throughput rating is, and it's not the port speed, it's listed in the specs.

"Up to" is the clincher, isn't it

--->Up to 11.5Mbps WAN-to-Lan throughput

I appreciate your feedback - I'm off to look at higher end firewalls.

D

It doesn't matter what the connect speed is, it's the rated through-put for the mode you are using that matters.

That's no excuse, PAN and ThunderBird do Usenet without any problems.

Then you don't understand features and how the impact performance. Like it or not, it's a CHEAP device and you should expect some trade-offs vs a real firewall.

You need to adjust the MTU to some thing optimal for your connection -

1500 DOES NOT MEAN IT'S OPTIMAL FOR YOUR NEW CONNECTION.

Your assumptions are not reasonable, they were ignorant and ill informed. If you took 5 minutes to read the specs on the device you were purchasing you would have seen the real performance stats.

As does Emacs - but I don't particularly like any of those clients either. If you don't like the way Google handles groups then complain to them. It's not necessary for you to tell me what client I should use

- if you don't like what you see, then just ignore me! I'm sure there's a "Block this sende" in your client!

--->That's no excuse, PAN and ThunderBird do Usenet without any problems.

Sure I do - at least to some extent- but I simply didn't expect performance to be impacted THAT much. I'm not (nor to I want to be) a firewall expert. "Cheap" is a relative term - I remember when a 300 baud modem cost thousands of dollars - now a broadband modem costs $50. Cheap does not imply subpar.

--->Then you don't understand features and how the impact performance. Like it or not, it's a CHEAP device and you should expect some trade-offs vs a real firewall.

Thank you - it must be nice to be you - all-knowing and so forth. I guess I'm just not as smart as you - I hope there's still room for me on the planet! I wonder where in the store I could have read the throughput spec? The very detailed product specs on the side of the box (which I did read in the store, taking more than 5 minutes) didn't include the throughput number - otherwise I would have noticed it immediately. Is it your conjecture that people should never go to a store for anything without having done a detailed analysis in advance? Where is the time for such analysis? The good news is that the store will take the product back.

--->Your assumptions are not reasonable, they were ignorant and ill informed. If you took 5 minutes to read the specs on the device you were purchasing you would have seen the real performance stats.

D

It is nice to be me, I've paid my dues and learned how to purchase without falling for the hype and without making assumptions - something that everyone does after making the mistakes you've made, unless they want to remain blissfully ignorant.

You bought something without doing any research, something that you needed for your higher speed internet connection, something that you made unfounded assumptions with. After a few more purchases like that you'll either get the idea that it's ALWAYS better to research first and purchase later, than it is to keep making blind purchases.

I'm sorry if you've taken this as being hard on you, but YOU made the mistakes and have blamed the vendor on YOUR problems when the vendors specs would have indicated if the choice was the right one for you or not. So, blaming the vendor is only showing your ignorance even more.

When you learn to "diagnose" or "troubleshoot" problems, and it doesn't matter what type of problem, the same rules apply, you've make a smarter shopper and purchase the right hardware the first time.

I have been satisfied with a Netscreen 5GT I use at work. Throughput is rated at 75mbps and 20mb/s vpn. Programming is cludgy, but I never did it before, so others may think that is ok. Some specs are listed here:

BTW: I just found out the router (Cisco 1601r) that is before this thing has a special serial connection that is limited to 2mbps, so when I switch from the half T I use now to 4mbps dsl, I have to change this router also! Now I just found out the 1605 I was going to use also has a limit of

2mb/s!! I guess I need to get a better one!! Here are some links, the router performance one is esp good!

Cisco_806

gr

Rather than ask all of us, how about calling Netgear Support and asking them - with all the firmware updates there is no way we could know what the real reason it - they can tell you better than any of us.

Did you ever adjust your MTU setting?

Have you tried 1430 yet?