Lowest cost Cisco router?

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by Marv, Dec 16, 2003.

  1. Marv

    Marv Guest

    Hello,

    I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    Cisco equipment.

    The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.

    Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    recommend?

    Thanks in advance.
    Marv, Dec 16, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Marv

    kallez Guest

    Hi Marv,
    I bought a used cisco 1700 series router at ebay : 100 Euro (ca. 110
    Dollar). It works perfectly!

    --
    mfg

    Karl-Heinz Zeitler

    "Marv" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:...
    > Hello,
    >
    > I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    > routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    > non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    > Cisco equipment.
    >
    > The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    > which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    >
    > Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    > recommend?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    kallez, Dec 16, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <brnsds$5f22m$-berlin.de>,
    kallez <> wrote:
    :Hi Marv,
    :I bought a used cisco 1700 series router at ebay : 100 Euro (ca. 110
    :Dollar). It works perfectly!

    But your used Cisco router probably did not include a license to use
    IOS, and you are probably not going to be able to get maintenance on it.
    --
    The Knights Of The Lambda Calculus aren't dead --this is their normal form!
    Walter Roberson, Dec 16, 2003
    #3
  4. Hi,

    Maybe a 831 would suffice. It's a router with two 10/100 ethernet
    "interfaces" of which one is a 4 port switch/hub.

    Erik

    "Marv" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello,
    >
    > I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    > routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    > non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    > Cisco equipment.
    >
    > The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    > which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    >
    > Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    > recommend?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    Erik Tamminga, Dec 16, 2003
    #4
  5. Marv

    kallez Guest

    If you buy a mercedes-benz, then you buy it "as shown", or do you have to
    buy a licence? I buyed a router "as shown", and I use it!!!!

    --
    > kallez <> wrote:
    > :Hi Marv,
    > :I bought a used cisco 1700 series router at ebay : 100 Euro (ca. 110
    > :Dollar). It works perfectly!
    >
    > But your used Cisco router probably did not include a license to use
    > IOS, and you are probably not going to be able to get maintenance on it.
    > --
    > The Knights Of The Lambda Calculus aren't dead --this is their normal

    form!
    kallez, Dec 16, 2003
    #5
  6. In article <bro19g$5j1he$-berlin.de>,
    kallez <> wrote:
    :If you buy a mercedes-benz, then you buy it "as shown", or do you have to
    :buy a licence? I buyed a router "as shown", and I use it!!!!

    That -might- be fine for you in Germany (but I've seen some longish legal
    debates over exactly what Germany law says that tends to indicate
    otherwise); it certainly isn't fine for the original poster in the USA.

    In the USA, each time the user router was booted would count as
    "copying" IOS for the purposes of copyright law, and if one does
    not have a valid license, then after a low number of copies had been made,
    copyright law would deem the "copying" to be a criminal offence, for
    which one could be put in prison for 5 years and heavily fined
    ($US50000 as I recall -- $US500,000 for cases involving commercial copying.)

    --
    Perposterous!! Where would all the calculators go?!
    Walter Roberson, Dec 16, 2003
    #6
  7. Marv

    kallez Guest

    This would mean, someone buys a router and pays , let's say, 300 dollar for
    the IOS, then he sells the router, the new owner has to pay again 300 dollar
    for the license of IOS
    Is this the opinion for a company to make money by itself?

    --
    mfg

    Karl-Heinz Zeitler
    Systembetreuer
    Volksschule Marktleuthen

    "Walter Roberson" <-cnrc.gc.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:bro22j$9ef$...
    > In article <bro19g$5j1he$-berlin.de>,
    > kallez <> wrote:
    > :If you buy a mercedes-benz, then you buy it "as shown", or do you have to
    > :buy a licence? I buyed a router "as shown", and I use it!!!!
    >
    > That -might- be fine for you in Germany (but I've seen some longish legal
    > debates over exactly what Germany law says that tends to indicate
    > otherwise); it certainly isn't fine for the original poster in the USA.
    >
    > In the USA, each time the user router was booted would count as
    > "copying" IOS for the purposes of copyright law, and if one does
    > not have a valid license, then after a low number of copies had been made,
    > copyright law would deem the "copying" to be a criminal offence, for
    > which one could be put in prison for 5 years and heavily fined
    > ($US50000 as I recall -- $US500,000 for cases involving commercial

    copying.)
    >
    > --
    > Perposterous!! Where would all the calculators go?!
    kallez, Dec 16, 2003
    #7
  8. Marv

    kallez Guest

    Dear Walter,
    in Germany you als can buy hardware and you have to buy a license for the
    software, running on it. With my cisco-router there was a seperate license
    to use the IOS of cisco, too. The earlier owner has to declare, that he has
    no copy of the software. So there is no big difference between germany and
    USA.

    --
    mfg

    Karl-Heinz Zeitler
    Systembetreuer
    Volksschule Marktleuthen

    "Walter Roberson" <-cnrc.gc.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:bro22j$9ef$...
    > In article <bro19g$5j1he$-berlin.de>,
    > kallez <> wrote:
    > :If you buy a mercedes-benz, then you buy it "as shown", or do you have to
    > :buy a licence? I buyed a router "as shown", and I use it!!!!
    >
    > That -might- be fine for you in Germany (but I've seen some longish legal
    > debates over exactly what Germany law says that tends to indicate
    > otherwise); it certainly isn't fine for the original poster in the USA.
    >
    > In the USA, each time the user router was booted would count as
    > "copying" IOS for the purposes of copyright law, and if one does
    > not have a valid license, then after a low number of copies had been made,
    > copyright law would deem the "copying" to be a criminal offence, for
    > which one could be put in prison for 5 years and heavily fined
    > ($US50000 as I recall -- $US500,000 for cases involving commercial

    copying.)
    >
    > --
    > Perposterous!! Where would all the calculators go?!
    kallez, Dec 16, 2003
    #8
  9. In article <bro3be$5nqs8$-berlin.de>,
    kallez <> wrote:
    :This would mean, someone buys a router and pays , let's say, 300 dollar for
    :the IOS, then he sells the router, the new owner has to pay again 300 dollar
    :for the license of IOS

    Cisco has a "relicensing" program. According to postings that have been
    made here, "relicensing" a device is very expensive, and will bring
    the cost of the purchase up to very close to what you would have paid
    Cisco for a refurbished unit.

    :Is this the opinion for a company to make money by itself?

    Sorry, I do not understand your intended meaning in that sentance.

    IOS has never been transferable, but apparently Cisco would often allow
    it to be effectively transferred if you bought SmartNet. The 'relicensing'
    program is only a few months old now, and is Cisco's reaction to the flood
    of items on eBay; now Cisco insists that you "relicense" before you can
    get SmartNet.
    --
    IMT made the sky
    Fall.
    Walter Roberson, Dec 16, 2003
    #9
  10. Marv

    News Account Guest

    A 1710 has one Fast Ethernet and one regular Ethernet.

    Don Woodward

    "Marv" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello,
    >
    > I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    > routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    > non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    > Cisco equipment.
    >
    > The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    > which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    >
    > Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    > recommend?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    News Account, Dec 16, 2003
    #10
  11. Marv

    Marv Guest

    Thanks Eric. This solution would be ok if it wasn't for the fact that
    the WAN ethernet is only 10mbit. I need to connect two 100mbit
    networks and will probably saturate a 10mbit interface.

    Looks like the 1712 is going to be the lowest (new) cost solution.

    Thanks,
    Marv

    >Hi,
    >
    >Maybe a 831 would suffice. It's a router with two 10/100 ethernet
    >"interfaces" of which one is a 4 port switch/hub.
    >
    >Erik
    >
    >"Marv" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Hello,
    >>
    >> I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    >> routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    >> non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    >> Cisco equipment.
    >>
    >> The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    >> which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    >>
    >> Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    >> recommend?
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance.

    >
    Marv, Dec 17, 2003
    #11
  12. Where the heck did you come up with that!? When a router is purchased along
    with a software license (automatic these days in almost, if not all cases)
    transfer of ownership of the router includes the transfer of the software
    license that was originally purchased with the router. If the router was
    purchased with IP only and sold with IP only, there is absolutely no
    copyright infringment. However, if the person sold the router with
    Enterprise IOS, then there is a problem. It also has nothing to do with how
    many times the router was booted. Maybe you're thinking of Canadian laws,
    but that's not how it works in the US.

    > That -might- be fine for you in Germany (but I've seen some longish legal
    > debates over exactly what Germany law says that tends to indicate
    > otherwise); it certainly isn't fine for the original poster in the USA.
    >
    > In the USA, each time the user router was booted would count as
    > "copying" IOS for the purposes of copyright law, and if one does
    > not have a valid license, then after a low number of copies had been made,
    > copyright law would deem the "copying" to be a criminal offence, for
    > which one could be put in prison for 5 years and heavily fined
    > ($US50000 as I recall -- $US500,000 for cases involving commercial

    copying.)
    Mike Gallagher, Dec 17, 2003
    #12
  13. Walter is absolutely correct about the software non-transferrability,
    disregard my statement below, except for the booting part. Looks like this
    has been around since about July 2003.

    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/ordering...software_transfer_and_licensing_overview.html

    Mike

    "Mike Gallagher" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Where the heck did you come up with that!? When a router is purchased

    along
    > with a software license (automatic these days in almost, if not all cases)
    > transfer of ownership of the router includes the transfer of the software
    > license that was originally purchased with the router. If the router was
    > purchased with IP only and sold with IP only, there is absolutely no
    > copyright infringment. However, if the person sold the router with
    > Enterprise IOS, then there is a problem. It also has nothing to do with

    how
    > many times the router was booted. Maybe you're thinking of Canadian laws,
    > but that's not how it works in the US.
    >
    > > That -might- be fine for you in Germany (but I've seen some longish

    legal
    > > debates over exactly what Germany law says that tends to indicate
    > > otherwise); it certainly isn't fine for the original poster in the USA.
    > >
    > > In the USA, each time the user router was booted would count as
    > > "copying" IOS for the purposes of copyright law, and if one does
    > > not have a valid license, then after a low number of copies had been

    made,
    > > copyright law would deem the "copying" to be a criminal offence, for
    > > which one could be put in prison for 5 years and heavily fined
    > > ($US50000 as I recall -- $US500,000 for cases involving commercial

    > copying.)
    >
    >
    >
    Mike Gallagher, Dec 17, 2003
    #13
  14. In article <>,
    Mike Gallagher <> wrote:
    :Where the heck did you come up with that!? When a router is purchased along
    :with a software license (automatic these days in almost, if not all cases)
    :transfer of ownership of the router includes the transfer of the software
    :license that was originally purchased with the router.

    No it doesn't, not if the software license says otherwise; if the software
    license says otherwise, then it takes specific law to override the
    terms of the contract. In Germany, there -are- some specific ownership
    laws that override contracts, but even native German speakers disagree
    over what those laws cover, so I can't tell what the exact situation is
    there.

    Cisco does specifically say that the software license is not transferable.
    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/serv/mkt/sup/tsssv/opmsup/smton/ctoa_qa.htm

    "It is important to understand that software licenses and service
    agreements are not transferable."

    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/csc/refurb_equipment/swlicense.html

    Like many high-tech companies that produce software, Cisco adopts
    a policy of non-transferability of its software in order to protect
    its intellectual property rights. What this means in practice is
    that owners of Cisco products are only allowed to transfer, re-sell
    or re-lease used Cisco hardware and not the embedded software that
    runs on the hardware.

    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/csc/refurb_equipment/swpolicy.html

    Cisco's policy is that Software, whether Standalone or Embedded, is
    not transferable, except where a listed exception below applies,
    and except, of course, where Cisco's contract expressly allows it.
    Any other transfers will require the payment of a new license fee
    (see Global Price List).
    --
    Strange but true: there are entire WWW pages devoted to listing
    programs designed to obfuscate HTML.
    Walter Roberson, Dec 17, 2003
    #14
  15. Marv

    JC Guest

    A 1700 is not going to push anywhere near 100Mb of traffic. The interface
    speeds don't really have much to do with throughput rate on the lower end
    routers. It's going to be processor speed.

    Here is a link that states the 1751 only gets 4.3Mb throughput using 64byte
    packets and fast switching.

    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/...ucts_qanda_item09186a00800918d1.shtml#xtocid9

    What you need to do is benchmark your current networks getting an idea of
    how much traffic goes between them. Getting an approximation of this tells
    you what type of equipment you are going to need.

    If you are simply connecting two lan segments together and you want
    performance, a layer 3 switch is going to be your best choice.

    JC

    --

    "Marv" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Thanks Eric. This solution would be ok if it wasn't for the fact that
    > the WAN ethernet is only 10mbit. I need to connect two 100mbit
    > networks and will probably saturate a 10mbit interface.
    >
    > Looks like the 1712 is going to be the lowest (new) cost solution.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Marv
    >
    > >Hi,
    > >
    > >Maybe a 831 would suffice. It's a router with two 10/100 ethernet
    > >"interfaces" of which one is a 4 port switch/hub.
    > >
    > >Erik
    > >
    > >"Marv" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> Hello,
    > >>
    > >> I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    > >> routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    > >> non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    > >> Cisco equipment.
    > >>
    > >> The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    > >> which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    > >>
    > >> Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    > >> recommend?
    > >>
    > >> Thanks in advance.

    > >

    >
    JC, Dec 17, 2003
    #15
  16. Marv

    John Llort Guest

    "Marv" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello,
    >
    > I've been doing some research to find the lowest cost solutions for
    > routing two 100mbit networks together (internally). This company is
    > non profit so cost is always a concern, yet I prefer to stick with
    > Cisco equipment.
    >
    > The lowest I've found that accomplishes the above is the Cisco 1712,
    > which has a 10/100 WAN connection and 4 port 10/100 switch built-in.
    >
    > Does anybody know of anything lower in cost than this that they could
    > recommend?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.


    Actually 80 bucks will get you a Cisco BEFSR41
    John Llort, Dec 17, 2003
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Guest
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    759
    Clive
    May 14, 2004
  2. Illusion
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,784
    sPiDEr
    Jul 9, 2003
  3. Castravete
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    395
    SysAdm
    Feb 11, 2005
  4. punlic
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    417
    Don Gould
    May 2, 2004
  5. news.xtra.co.nz

    NZ Cost vs US Cost...

    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 29, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    862
    MarkH
    Jan 5, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page