How do you rate the cisco 1710 router?

I have a 25 'low-util users' 10/100 network size customer (phew) who is in need for a router. They currently use a server to connect onto another independent high speed network which caters for their internet access.

The requirements for the router are :-
LAN–to–LAN router
NAT/PAT Translation
Basic firewalling
VPN Tunnelling – 1 64K site-to-site tunnel & maximum of 5 simultaneously mobile tunnels all running DES.
VLAN tagging req’d in the near future.

With this I was thinking along the lines of a cisco 2621 with a VPN-AIM module. The only problem is that once you add up the cost of the router, IOS, modules etc the cost is crazy. This is when the 1710 comes into play. For around 1 grand you can buy an all-in-one feature rich router capable of all the above requirements – hardware VPN upto E1 speeds, no need to upgrade IOS etc. What I’m not sure of is how powerful is the 1710? Has anyone installed one of them in a network of 25+ users? – Did it perform to your expectation?

Any input would be much appreciated

Thanks
rr

Roadie

Hadn't seen the 1710 before. H/W VPN and general feature set looks good. If you're going to use all the features then going for the 64mb memory option certainly wouldn't hurt. $1900 List for cisco looks like a good deal. Especially as you dont need the WAN side connectivity.

"no need to upgrade IOS" whilst it may have the feature set to start with (you don't need IPX do you :)?) the chances of not needing to upgrade at some point are pretty slim ;)

Deano

Deano

Oh, you just brought back the happy times of supporting IPX. what fun I had....hmmmmmm :) thank god its an IP only requirement!

What I'm concerned about with the 1710 is :-

A) its not modular, so once you have chosen it you better hope that it performs. I don't want to be in a position in a yrs time telling them that they need a new router :eek:

B) No one that I know of has come across this router (yet) The power is unknown :eek:

I'm off to trawl the net for some possible reviews on this sucker....I neeed more data :)

Thanks for the quick response

rr

Well we use the normal 1700 series as customer routers and certainly haven't seen any problems. The NAT isn't that difficult for 25 users. We run that size off 1603s with no problems. With both NAT/PAT and the F/W feature set you need memory for the connection tables but even 32 should be more than enough. Will it be running a routing protocol or just statically routed to a next hop on the "Bigger" network. If its in a Large EIGRP or OSPF area then on top of the other bits that may be a concern. Some platforms see a drop off in throughput if you use the vlan tagging (I presume you will be trunking it to a local switch)

By far the hardest thing is the VPN which when done in H/W shouldn't be an issue. My biggest concern might be the "bleeding edge" IOS you probably need. Cisco of late (always ?:rolleyes:)) seem to be struggling to keep IOS stable with some of the new hardware.

You could always stick smoothwall on a PC :) That should cope with the feature list.

Deano

[Edited by dsmith - 12/12/2001 2:22:07 PM]

You migth want to look at

http://www.nwc.com/redirects/wca.html
http://www.networkcomputing.com/1120/1120f3.html
http://wwwin.cisco.com/cmc/cc/pd/rt/1700/pc175_ai.pdf
http://www.infoxpress.com/reviewtracker/reprints.asp?page_id=248

The 1710 was designed for Cable Modem/DSL access which is the
reason for 10/100 (custmomer LAN) 10MB CPE equipment. Should be OK for LAN to LAN. You might be better off with a 1720, 1750, or 1760 depending upon if you might want to upgrade in the future. All the 1700 series share the same processor so speed should be OK. The only thing the be aware of is that DES is OK but 3DES takes up a lot of processor time. Which IPSec client are you going to use for the remote access? You might want to look at the hardware encryption device if you increase the amount of encryption. 802.1q should be fine for VLAN tagging. What are you going to use VLANS for?

Hope this helps

Simon

Oh the hardware encryption device can be added to the 1710 when
required (internal slot).

Si

Well I haven't had any direct experience of the 1710 but I know it is on our list of approved Cisco routers and my company (Equant) are extremley picky about what goes on their approved list (i.e. a fair amount of testing is done prior to approval). We use a variety of boxes from an 800 to a 12000 depending on the solution required (at the last count I think we had inexcess of 15000 25xx series boxes deployed worldwide (now being upgraded to 26xx))

Chris

Cheers guys

Deano - Smoothwall is excellent, the only problem is that we can't make much money from that solution ;)

Simon - The finance deptartment want their own subnet when thye get two new servers in Jan. Thanks for the links aswell, great info :)

Chris - Cheers m8, I never really used anything below 25xx so you input was much appreciated.

rr