Increase session limit for Balance 310X

Product Discussion Feature Requests
1

Hi All,

Please consider this. The 310 5g seems to have an arbitrary limit of 15 sessions, which seems too low. Even balance 20x supports 15. Lower end units support more.

peplink-balance-spec-weirdness.png
peplink-balance-spec-weirdness.png1387Ă—1857 189 KB

I attached a screenshot showing this in more detail. The session limits are wildly arbitrary. A Balance 20x can do 50 IPSEC tunnels, but the wayyy more powerful Balance 310 5G can only do 5. They both support the same number of L2TP/OpenVPN users, despite the wide gap in performance. It seems to be a simple coded limit.

May I submit for inclusion in the upcoming 8.4 GA, a simple fix to change the Balance 310 5G’s remote access users limit to 50 to match the Balance 305, or at least set it to 30.

And then maybe for the next version, thoroughly review those limits, to make sure they make sense.

If there is a reasonable explanation for the wild variations in limits on those different models, I’d love to hear about it. It would be really great if Peplink was more open about actual hardware specs used in different models, that way I can avoid any comparisons to cisco meraki when I take questions from clients about them.

Thanks,

Knight

1 Like
2

I think this should be titled “Increase session limit on Balance 310 5G”. But definitely some weird math going on with these limits. Makes no sense why the 310 5G has the same user count sizing, and only 5 IPSEC tunnels and 15 remote users, when the 310X is 20 IPSEC and 50 remote users.

3

different hardware? cpu/memory/etc plays a factor?