Dear Forum, I want to purchase mediafast 750 solely for content caching only. I have another balance router doing failover, bonding etc., My question thus is, can I deploy Mediafast 750 as a strictly layer 2 (bridge) content caching solution? I am guessing this will be in ‘drop in mode’, but my main reason for the deployment is for content caching only nothing else, any advise please?
Any advise please?
Technically Mediafast 750 can be deploy as the 'Drop-In Mode" for the content caching & multi WAN router. We are more concerns about the overall network design for network that include the Balance router and the MediaFast router and whether or not the device should be combine into a single router device.
Possible to advice us the Balance router model that doing WAN loadbalancing/failover and bonding and also more info for the existing network in-order for us to further discuss on this ?
Well, I have used several balance over the years from my first balance 30 to my current balance 710 and as expected they all worked flawlessly with no single issue however, I have never seen or even own a mediafast before. I just hope in the quality, flawlessness and functionality of peplink devices I have owned over the years to believe in the mediafast models, besides, I am yet to read a negative review about it online anyways.
I am now operating in a small WISP environment and balance 710 is solid as my core router however, I need a cache solution. My topology is such that, there is a firewall and billing server between the 710 and my Layer 2 switches connecting to the client. Now I need a cache just before the switches. So in my opinion, I would strongly advocate for a standalone mediafast caching router as a choice rather than buying another router + Cache (mediafast 750b) just to solve a cache problem because, all other features such as bonding, fail-over etc, would be useless on the 750b!. A simple layer 2 or bridge cache solution would fit in nicely…I guess.
You should consider to replace the B710 using the MediaFast 750. The MediaFast 750 having the same routing features like B710 with the content caching feature.
For more information, please refer to the URL below:
MediaFast Caching feature can be turn on/off depend the requirement.
Please refer to the attached screenshots.
If you read my topology well, it’s useless having a cache behind a bandwidth and traffic shaper firewall, though it will save on bandwidth, the client will never be able to fully appreciate the full potential as the bandwidth manger will always restrict users to the allocated limit, and you want to make sure you give out the full 'cache-out 'hence cache device is better just before the switches…except of-course your last mile is saturated.
What I really think I need is a peplink standalone cache device, hope fully it’ll come soon.
What sitloongs is trying to get across is that the MediaFast 750 is identical to the Balance 710 in terms of connections, specifications and supported features, with the addition of the content caching engine. In your case, the MediaFast 750 is a direct replacement for the Balance 710 and you will gain the caching feature.
This is a better approach then adding another device to the network.
Core router(failover/load balance etc bpl-710) - Firewall (per (IP BWM) - switches. Now if I change to mediafast 750 - firewall - switches, that is still ok , but I think the full cache-out potencila of the 750 will be realized because of the firewall bandwith manager. It would have been better to have:
Core Router (Failover/load balance etc/. bpl-710 - Firewall - cache device (with full cache out) - switches and then client.