Re: [gentoo-user] [OT router advice] a router capable of detailed logs

[Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info>]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:31, Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:
> This is way OT, but this list is such a great resource I suspect the
> advice gotten here will be more to the point. ( I have posted to a
> network hardware group as well)
>
> I've bumped my home lan router to a gigabit from the old 10/100
> (NETGEAR FVS318).
>
> I made the move for the gigabit lan ports mainly.  That is, I was
> happy with other aspects of the old router.  I ended up with a cisco
> RVS4000 v2.
>
> The cisco solved the gigabit problem with 4 lan ports and even a
> gigabit on the Internet port... (which is probably not really doing
> any thing on a cable connection).  And it wasn't hideously
> expensive ($112.91).
>
> I could have solved the problem with gigabit switches behind the
> router for lan usage, just as well, and may go to that yet, and move
> back to the old NETGEAR router.  But somehow I expected the cisco to
> be something that was `excitingly' new and fun to play with.
>
> I'm disappointed in the cisco so far as logging is concerned.
>
> The logs give only bare information like this:
>
> Mar 10 10:24:21  - [Firewall Log-PORT SCAN] TCP Packet - 60.173.11.56 --> 98.217.231.32
> Mar 10 10:24:21  - [Firewall Log-PORT SCAN] TCP Packet - 60.173.11.56 --> 98.217.231.32
> [...]
>
> No mention of which port is involved.  Not only on port scans but
> ports are never reported.  And of course if you wanted to pursue any
> of it by way of google, you'd need the port number.
>
> The Old Netgear sent logs like this (wrapped for mail):
>
>  Sat, 2007-07-28 12:00:11 - TCP packet - Source: 161.170.244.20 -
>  Destination: 70.131.83.195 - [Invalid sequence number received with
>   Reset, dropping packet Src 443 Dst 1385 from WAN]
>
> -------        ---------       ---=---       ---------      --------
>
> I went for the cisco instead of a newer `gigabit' NETGEAR after seeing
> several bad reviews about them.  And I just assumed the cisco would
> have as good or better other features.
>
> Another little problem is that the Cicso had reached its end of life
> and was reported as such by cisco, well before I bought it.  But of
> course, retailers (not cisco) don't bother to give that kind of info,
> but the result is that a kind of blackball list that was part of the
> deal is no longer kept up to date.
>
> So, cutting to the chase; can anyone recommend from actual use, a home
> lan router that has gigabit lan ports and very configurable/
> informative logging options?
>
> ps - I'm not interested in running an old linux or openbsd, machine as
> router.  Having a silent cool router the size and weight of a medium
> book is too appealing.
>

Have you checked out Mikrotik's RB750G? 5 GbE ports:

http://routerboard.com/pricelist/download_file.php?file_id=256

Mikrotik OS is Linux-based, the firewall is Netfilter-based, and it's
Lua-scriptable.

Rgds,
--
Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~
Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com