Hacker News Reader

Comment by simoncion | Hacker News Reader

Vaguely off-topic: Why'd you move from the ERL to the ERX? If my ERL burst into flames today, would you suggest that I replace it with an X? Assume that I have $120 dollars to spend and I don't need (but wouldn't particularly mind) extra switch ports. Is there anything that the ERL does better than the X?

View on HN

What kind of uplink/downlink bandwidth do you have/need?

As the other poster said, the ERX doesn't have hardware offloading (UBNT beta forums says they're working on it), but for my use case, there's no difference in performance between the two so the cheaper ($50 vs $99) ERX is fine.

ERL has the advantage of the onboard flash being a USB flash drive plugged internally and a dedicated serial console port; ERX is permanent onboard flash and no serial console unless you open it up and find the points on the board.

I'm going to dodge your question [0] and ask a different one that cuts to the heart of the matter [1]: "Unless I'm mis-reading the datasheet, it seems like the device has a worst-case switching speed of ~8.3 mbit/second. Have you played around with it to try to determine its performance when filtering or routing packets? (As opposed to just switching packets.)."

[0] Thanks much for the other info, though! That's useful stuff.

[1] Sorry for not asking this question in my original post. :(

I can easily max out doing a speedtest on my 50/10 link from a client behind the ERX to a speed test server on the WAN side, if that helps any.

Yeah, that helps! Thanks for the info.

It looks like X doesn't have any hardware acceleration for forwarding. With 64b packets, X can only push 130k PPS while ERL should do at least 1M PPS. This doesn't matter in a home network though.

kornholi, do you have an ER X? If you do, I appreciate your first-hand information. If you don't, I asked mrbill the question that I asked because I was looking for his first-hand experience.

Regardless: Much love, man! :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com