blocks|key|4463388|text|既然你已经在使用思科，我会坚持这样做。假设你还没有一堆各种设备..。把你的管理帽子和数字，在未来公司可以雇用一个人谁知道‘思科’。此外，如果您有任何问题之间的VPN之间，思科将支持两端。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4463389|尽管我从来没有使用过SonicWall，所以可能配置非常相似，而且Netgear也是相似的，但是通常情况下，使用相同的东西更容易。|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|D|$]]

Since you are already using Cisco I would just stick with that. Assuming you don't already have a bunch of assorted equipment... Put on your management hat and figure in the future the company can hire someone who knows 'Cisco'. Also, if you are having any issues with the VPN between the two, Cisco will support both ends.

Although, I have never used SonicWall so maybe the configuration is very similar and Netgear is similar, it generally easier to have the same stuff.

blocks|key|4463600|text|我使用Peplink平衡已经有两年多了，路由器的故障转移已经完美无缺了。他们的低端模式应该适合你的预算。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.peplink.com/^0|3|9|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

I have been using a <a href="http://www.peplink.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Peplink Balance</a> for over 2 years now, and the router's failover has been working flawlessly. Their low end model should fit your budget.

blocks|key|4463688|text|我已经使用了几年的Linksys/Cisco+RV042在商业地点，正如您所描述的，并取得了良好的成功。从您的列表中，我唯一没有做的就是将P2P+VPN转到Cisco，但是我确实使用内置的PPTP进行远程访问。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4463689|此型号目前是我们的SAAS产品的客户推荐。|4463690|编辑:我们使用RV016，因为它有更多的交换机端口，因此可以被认为是一个整体一体的设备。|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|F|$]]

I have used the Linksys/Cisco RV042 for several years in commercial locations as you have described with good success. The only thing from your list I have not done is a P2P VPN to a Cisco ASA, but I do use the built-in PPTP VPN for remote access.

This model is currently our recommendation for customers of our SAAS product.

Edit: We use the RV016 because it has more switch ports and can therefore be considered as an all-in-one device.

blocks|key|726970|text|在3.5年的时间里，我对新城产品有很好的经验。工作完美无缺，从不需要注意。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.xincom.com/^0|C|2|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

I had quite a good experience with <a href="http://www.xincom.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Xincom</a> products over a period of 3.5 years. Worked flawlessly and never needed attention.

blocks|key|727116|text|梭子鱼链路平衡器：http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/balancers.php|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/balancers.php^0|9|1M|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

Barracuda Link balancer : <a href="http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/balancers.php" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/balancers.php</a>

blocks|key|4463728|text|与另一条评论一样，我们也使用了Linksys+RV082+(在rv016和rv042之间)。这是一个8端口的开关。我们用它作为故障转移设备。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4463729|我知道你的请求说你不关心负载平衡，但我想我也会评论我们最近在贷款平衡方面的经验，以防有人绊倒在这个帖子上寻找这些信息。|4463730|负载平衡工作，但非常原始。据我所知，这是每个包的负载平衡。这破坏了许多期望数据包来自同一个IP的SSL网站。我们通过使用设备将https流量绑定到特定的WAN连接来“解决”了这一问题，但这实际上否定了负载平衡功能。|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|F|$]]

Like another comment, we too have used the Linksys RV082 (in between the rv016 and rv042). This one is a 8 port switch. We used it as a failover device. 

I know your request said you didn't care about load balancing, but I thought I'd also comment with our recent experience with loan balancing in case someone stumbles accross this post looking for that information.

The load balancing works, but is very primitive. As far as I call tell, it's per packet load balancing. This wrecks havoc with many SSL websites that expect packets to be coming from the same IP. We've "solved" this by using the devices ability to bind https traffic to a specific WAN connection, but that effectively negates the load balancing features.

blocks|key|4463405|text|您还可能希望在产品评估中包括FatPipe。他们有几种解决方案，可以满足你的需要，虽然我不确定价格。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.fatpipeinc.com/^0|E|7|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

You may also want to include <a href="http://www.fatpipeinc.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">FatPipe</a> in your product evaluations. They have several solutions that may meet your needs, though I'm not sure about the price.

blocks|key|4463527|text|我们过去使用过热砖。防火墙VPN+800/2应该在这个价格范围内，但您可能需要在ebay上找到它。看上去他们现在没货了。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.hotbrick.com/produto.asp?tipo=3&catpro=2^0|7|2|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@$A|L|B|M|1|N]]|C|$]]]|D|$E|$5|F|G|H|C|$I|J]]]]

We've used <a href="http://www.hotbrick.com/produto.asp?tipo=3&amp;catpro=2" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Hotbricks</a> in the past. The Firewall VPN 800/2 should be within that price range, but you may need to find it on ebay. It looks like they are out of stock on it now.

Looking for a good dual WAN (for failover, don't care about load balancing) router for a small network (&lt;50 devices). I don't want anything home-grown - has to be commercially supported hardware.

Some requirements:

<ul>
<li>VPN from this device to Cisco ASA5510
(both WAN interfaces) </li>
<li>DHCP </li>
<li>Wired WAN failover</li>
<li>&lt; $500</li>
<li>10/100 (1000 would be nice)</li>
</ul>

Nice to have:
 - "stackable" or otherwise support device failover

I've considered:

<ul>
<li>NetGear FVS336G</li>
<li>Cisco RV042 </li>
<li>SonicWall TZ200</li>
</ul>

But they are all about the "same" as far as features are concerned. Thoughts? What have people used?

Edit: Please say in what context you had your device deployed. Home office aint big enough :D Thanks!!

Dual WAN Router w/Failover for < 50 IP Network Recommendation

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

寻找一个好的双广域网(对于故障转移，不要关心负载平衡)路由器的小型网络(<50设备)。我不想要任何土生土长的东西都需要商业支持的硬件。一些要求：VPN从这个设备到思科ASA5510 (两个广域网接口)DHCP有线广域网故障转移<500美元10/100 (1000更好)很高兴拥有：-“堆栈”或其他支持设备故障转移的方法。我考虑过：NetGear FVS336G思科RV042SonicWall TZ2

问< 50 IP网络推荐的双广域网路由器W/故障转移
EN

回答 8

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问< 50 IP网络推荐的双广域网路由器W/故障转移EN

回答 8

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问< 50 IP网络推荐的双广域网路由器W/故障转移
EN