Wan to LAN 問題

本帖最後由 kofz 於 2015-10-20 05:20 編輯

入面提到既......
http://www.mobile01.com/topicdet ... 03&p=8#57704992

LAN to LAN gigabit switch throughput
LAN to WAN NAT throughput
WAN to LAN porforwarding throughput

以上三個,其實有乜分別?
即係RT1900ac只食到400Mbps?用500mb/1000mb光纖咪浪費晒?

當家用Router供內部電腦用寬頻線上網時,通常會有處理損耗。  個測試分別測試左內部電腦之間,內部去外部 同 外部去內部既傳輸速度。

細節講唔到太多,不過應該係如你所理解。

TOP

當家用Router供內部電腦用寬頻線上網時,通常會有處理損耗。  個測試分別測試左內部電腦之間,內部去外部  ...
KimuraKouichi 發表於 2015-10-20 09:02



    唔係處理損耗,而係 NAT 同 switching 係由兩個唔同獨立既零件做野,switching chips 只做 port switching,由於屬非智能類別個速度可以好快(一樣有 switching capacity limit 但正常家用唔使理)。但係 NAT(注意,port forwarding 都係 NAT 一種)要 CPU 改 packet,如果唔夠快個 bottleneck 好易就出係呢度,所以好多聲稱 Gigabit router 只不過係 LAN-LAN 做到足 1000M 但 LAN-WAN performance 就可以好差

TOP

你以上既解釋我認為係中文有處理損耗之意
多謝你細節既解釋,所以點解我唔講細節就係咁解

TOP

你以上既解釋我認為係中文有處理損耗之意
多謝你細節既解釋,所以點解我唔講細節就係咁解 ...
KimuraKouichi 發表於 2015-10-20 09:30

電話App改唔到貼
跟番你用字做“處理瓶頸”

TOP

回覆 1# kofz

The most important thing is WAN -> LAN.

It is typical for current consumer routers without hardware NAT to be limited to 300-400Mbps or below.

Therefore it is really important to have hardware NAT (or Broadcom CTF).

My only experience with a Marvell-based router is really bad.

TOP