40 of 41 people found the following review helpful
on August 21, 2012
I'm a Cisco Small Business fan boy these days after they sent me a replacement for a second hand switch (SF300-24)that had a flash memory issue. No questions asked and at their expense (overnight shipping too!). So I returned to Cisco SB when shopping for a new router.
I purchased the RV042G because it offers gigabit connectivity and two WAN ports coupled with customer service that is miles better than the usual phone tree/call center BS that you get with most consumer grade network gear(including Cisco/Linksys home products). I'm an AT&T U-verse customer and while their service is good, it's not quite quick enough (12mbps) for my family of iPad/netflix/HBOgo addicts. So the ability to put the router in "load balancing" mode and add on a cable modem to give us extra bandwidth was the biggest reason for the upgrade. There is no wireless on this router and for me that's perfect, could be a drawback for some.
Setup was very straight forward. I didn't even use the "set up wizard". Just changed a few settings through the web interface and it was online in a jiffy. It's probably not as easy as the setup on a typical home unit (ie. airport or Cisco Connect), so a little knowledge of protocols and ports is needed. There are not a lot of parental type controls on the unit. You can block specific domains and key words but I haven't seen any MAC or IP based filtering options in the menus yet, but I wouldn't really expect that given the intended audience for this unit. I'm not using the VPN functions right now, so I can't comment on those. There is only one thing I've found that seemed like an odd limitation of this unit. The DHCP server is limited to 50 clients, additional IP's would have to be assigned static. Overall, I'm really happy with the unit.
One last thing. Since this item is not available from Amazon proper, be careful who you buy it from. My first purchase was from Amazon seller "Nu Image". Waited more than a week for the unit and when it arrived, it was destroyed. They shipped it USPS packaged only in a plastic bag. They promised me an expedited replacement but days went by and nothing till Amazon issued a refund. When I asked about my replacement, I was told to just start over and order another one. I reordered from Amazon seller "The Nerds". Router was shipped via Fedex and was at my door (packed in a proper box) in 2 days and was cheaper to boot.
In my previous review I said that I hadn't found a way to set parental controls or do IP based filtering. I have since discovered how this is done on this router. There is not a parental settings page or anything like that but under the firewall option in the menu, you can set "access rules" till your heart is content. As with the basic set up of the unit, some knowledge of TCP/IP ports and services is required to get this set up. Mine is now configured to disallow traffic to my kid's ipods, Nindendo's and TV's after bed time.
I'm still very happy with this unit. Every function I have set up has worked great, even Xbox Live and in game chat have no NAT issues at all (port forwarding required.
96 of 109 people found the following review helpful
on January 19, 2013
Got this router based on Amazon reviews. I was pretty excited about the dual WAN capability as well as the gigabit ports (my existing wireless router is only fast ethernet capable and not gigabit). Once configured, I discovered that internet connections are dropped intermittently. Upon examining the logs, I found out that the router was refusing LAN->WAN connection, based on "Policy Violations", inspite of default policy settings that has no restrictions for LAN-> WAN traffic. A similar case has been logged by another Small Business User with Cisco and the SMB team has said that the issue "may be addressed as part of the next firmware release, and ETA is not known yet". Your support is a JOKE, Cisco - you put crap in the market for a premium price and don't even support it? My old router handled netflix streaming perfectly even when my blueray player was connected wirelessly. After buying this router, I connected the same blueray player via the ethernet port, and it is SLOWWWWWWW.......This is totally not acceptable - even the basic router function is not implemented properly and I attribute this to buggy firmware. Cisco had a lot of time to fine tune the RV0XX line, and this router just added gigabit capability (which is just updated hardware). Not sure what kind of nasty surprises await when I configure dual WANs.
01/30/2013 (Update) - I tried to flash the firmware again in the hopes that my problems would be resolved, but the router bricked. It is as good as a paperweight now. Stay away from this router like a plague. Cisco should be ashamed of themselves for putting such a substandard product in the market.I wish I could give zero stars......
02/01/2013 (Update) - Opened a ticket with Cisco. The support person tried to connect to the router and couldn't do so, so authorized a return. Once they get the unit in their return center, I heard that they will ship another unit to me and transfer the warranty to the new unit. However, I am liable for shipping the unit back and I will be getting a factory refurb. unit. Not too happy, but I am going with this option in lieu of this whole situation. Keeping my fingers crossed on the performance of the new unit. Will post an update.
02/11/2013 (Update) - Received the replacement unit and connected to my network with a lot of skepticism. However, the new unit does work satisfactorily. I have been throwing everything at it - no dropped connections, no refusals, streaming works perfectly (even with 2 movies streaming at the same time) and no hangups so far in the past 3 days. Changing my rating to 3 stars. Will post an update after more real world tests.
07/06/2013 (Update) - I am satisfied with this router thus far. No reboots over the past 5 months and my samsung Blu-ray player has no issues connecting to Netflix. Neutral rating still applies, as the product seems to be unpredictable. This will be my final update. Thanks to all for the encouragement.
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful
on August 1, 2013
The firmware for this unit is buggy with many unadvertised limitations.
I have only been at it for a few hours, but it started off ugly right away. I tried changing the DHCP range from 192.168.1.100 through 149 to 200 through 249. As soon as I entered the lower limit, I got an error window about the range being invalid. Every time I hit OK, the error repeated, with no opportunity to change either the upper or lower limit. I had to exit my browser, log in again and then changed the upper limit first. I also updated to the latest firmware.
When I changed to the 10.0.0.1 subnet, I was surprised to find I could still only set the LAN to /24 through /30. No /16 subnet support.
The VLAN support may as well be nonexistent. Each port can be set to VLAN1,2,3 or 4. No tagged/untagged membership controls. No control of the LAN address per VLAN. No control of DHCP per VLAN. Firewall rules only seemed to support LAN vs WAN, with no obvious way to enable or control any traffic between VLANs. [Update 20130808 Since no VLAN tagged frames seem to go in or out of the box, the implementation feels more like they are just providing up to 4 subnets, not 4 VLANs. Of course, you would expect to be able to set different addresses on each port if they called them subnets.]
Control of IPV6 transition tunneling is a single 6to4 enable checkbox with no other parameters to set up my IPV6 tunnel to Hurricane Electric.
Throughput is good enough for my FIOS 50/25 mbps connection, although I've seen other reviews indicate that the unit tops out at a little more than 100 mbps when used as a firewall. Benchmarks quoted in the 700 mbps range were apparently performed using the DMZ port with no firewall or NAT involved.
DHCP clients (static or dynamic) show up by name in forward DNS, but have no reverse DNS entries. Puppet server is not getting names to associate with the numeric IP addresses of clients.
Update after a week:
Throughput has been very solid, with no reboots or hang-ups. A small business with no need for VLANs or subnets would probably find this to be a fast and reliable unit. Many advanced features listed in the CISCO spec sheet are simply not usable.
Update at 2 weeks:
One more broken feature, SNMP returns a zero value for the sysObjectID, so monitoring tools like OpenNMS can not match the RV042G's detailed replies to any known MIB to extract throughput and other metrics.
18 of 20 people found the following review helpful
on October 12, 2012
We had bought the Netgear dual GigE VPN Prosafe router and it was a piece of crap. Once you get to 20-25 DHCP clients, it falls over dead every 24 hours. It's easy to get to that many even with 10 employees... what with cellphones, NAS boxes, PCs, etc...
We bought the RV042G for about the same amount $200, and it's like night and day here.
The Netgear could not add our WAN1 and WAN2 bandwidths at all. We got either 1 or 2 bandwidth, but never got 1 and 2 added together for downloads. Cisco pins the needle adding 1 and 2's max bandwidth for a single download. WIN Cisco.
Netgear's VPN setup was colossally complex. Cisco super easy for both PPTP and their QuickVPN SSL. WIN Cisco.
We have not rebooted Cisco router since we bought it ten days ago. WIN Cisco.
VPN performance through Netgore was painful, we thought it was just how VPN's work. Cisco VPN is like being in the office intranet... super fast. WIN Cisco.
The inside of the Cisco router has a bunch of Cisco labelled ASICs. We had to look inside because the first one we got had a mashed up front panel which we tried to fix ourselves. We ended up sending back to Amazon for a new one.
So the conclusion is. Just buy Cisco when it comes to routers. And this router here is NOT a Linksys piece of crap, but seems like real Cisco routing know how.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on December 6, 2014
Depending on your needs, this router will most likely either be 5-stars or 1. Let's start with what this router does well for me:
-Remarkably stable when only basic functions are used. I get 180+ day uptimes, with no hangs or dropouts, even under heavy load (including with constant P2P traffic, VOIP, streaming, multiple users surfing, simple Gateway-to-Gateway VPN, etc). The only time this router ever restarts is when power is lost, I update the firmware, or I need to unplug it for some other reason (changing AC outlet for example). See attached screenshot for proof. At the time the screenshot was taken, 216 days of solid uptime without a single interruption!
-Fast WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN throughput for residential connections. With 120/12 Mbit cable, there is no impact on throughput when compared with a direct connection to the cable modem.
-Plenty of basic configuration options, such as port forwarding, ACL, etc, which all work the way they are supposed to and do not negatively impact performance.
What could be improved from my experience:
-Dual WAN failover (with the current firmware) does not work properly in many cases, and needs to be revised by Cisco. For example, if either of your two modems self-assigns an IP address when there is no service (for example, 192.168.100.x), the router will think that WAN connection is active, and the failover to the other WAN port will not occur. This is regardless of whether or not NSD is enabled (for example, to ping a remote host). You'll simply have to change which WAN is set as Primary manually. For my situation, Smart Link Backup used to work correctly, until my ISP changed the firmware of the modem so that it self-assigns an IP address while attempting to re-establish the connection. A simple modification of the NSD feature would fix this. The router would just need to detect any change to the WAN IP address for NSD to engage (rather than wait for the WAN port to disconnect, or for there to be no assigned IP address).
As for VPN functionality, I have experimented with it on numerous occasions (on RV042, RV042 V3, and now RV042G), I have been able to establish a reliable Gateway-to-Gateway tunnel, but unable to set up a Client-to-Gateway VPN the way I would like. This is probably due to my own incompetence, rather than something fundamentally wrong with the RV042 series, but I could be wrong. I would defer to other reviewers who are more knowledgeable in that arena if VPN functionality is of the utmost importace to you.
I've been using these routers since 2004, and for residential connections where only one WAN port is needed, and VPN functionality is not required (or you only need Gateway-to-Gateway tunnels), you can't go wrong with the RV042G.
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
We were having performance issues on our network because the previous router wasn't built to handle the traffic we were trying to put through it. (The load builds up fast with IP phones, email, and other web traffic.)
That led me on a search for a higher performance business-class router that was still affordable - and this Cisco RV042G seemed like the perfect fit.
Once I got this, the setup was pretty straight-forward, but we immediately noticed some features that I had assumed would be standard. We also ran into some issues where this router just didn't want to play nice with our network.
Here is a quick list of issues we ran into:
- The built-in switch is NOT managed in any way - and there is no VLAN support at all. Interestingly enough, there is a menu drop-down on each port to select a VLAN; but, it won't let you change any of the network settings (like the IP range or subnet), so I'm not sure what the point is.
I like keeping the IP phone traffic off the normal network, which is impossible with this router.
The one managed feature it does support is allowing prioritization of port traffic. So I guess that's something...
- The DNS in this router refuses to play nice with our internal DNS server. This has made for a very frustrating week as item after item has broken down. We've had to resort to tweaking the hosts file, or setting manual records in our DNS server - and that's obviously not going to work long-term.
- This router only supports a single user account.
- The method for reserving IP addresses is an absolute mess. Also, the interface doesn't even attempt to put a name with MAC addresses - with makes IP reservation even more of a pain.
Having said all this, I will admit that the performance is actually very good, which makes me think this may be a pretty good router for a SOHO environment.
If, on the other hand, you are in any business that's moved beyond your house, I would highly recommend looking elsewhere.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on January 8, 2013
The most current firmware (4.2.1.02), as of 1/2013, does not work properly with Comcast native dual-stack IPv6. The router does not properly assign the IPv6 prefix to the LAN interface (DHCP-PD), it also does not properly insert the default route. Comcast has been working directly with Cisco on this, but there is no fix pending.
So, if you are hoping to use this router for IPV6, I suggest you hold off for now.
Other than that, the feature set appears to be OK with all the basic functionality, but power users will probably be disappointed.
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
on February 19, 2015
While the RV042G seems to work well as a router, it is NOT PCI compliant and will cause your network to fail the PCI-DSS Scan from Trustwave. The issues are that the router uses a flawed version of OpenSSL for it's QuickVPN and Remote management functions and issues certificates with only a 1024 bit key length (PCI requires a 2048 or higher key length) I have gotten no response from CISCO and indications from the Cisco community are that it is highly unlikely that the issues will b addressed in the future. I spent quite a bit of time selecting this router and now have to do it all over again.
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
on October 3, 2012
I took a few weeks to actually order this due to poor reviews on it. Anyway it was delivered today and I got it up and running within an hour and no problems. I'm running 2 servers hosting 4 websites and a email server, on a subnet is our home stuff. Not the most complex setup but basic networking was all you would need to know to accomplish this. The cisco replaced a DIR-655 that was the main router, the DIR is now on subnet duty. I had no problems with the web configuration interface, it was responsive and easy to use. I had a hard time believing cisco would put out junk due to my experience with them on a previous job. They stood behind their product and made it right if something was wrong.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on October 30, 2013
Pros: This router has a simple management UI which makes it very easy to set up. The VPN configuration is the simplest one I've seen in all of the business-class routers I've used - just one page, and you can see the entire VPN definition. This is the simplest implementation, and I prefer this approach best among the VPN routers I've used.
The router's CLAIMED NAT throughput speed is a whopping 800mbps, but reality is very different. On a 150mbps connection, I get a maximum throughput of about 132mbps. If you look up this router in various forums, there are many postings from users who have 1gbps connections - lucky them - who complain that they can only get max speeds around 135mbps. Those postings are more than a year old.
The other "gotcha" with this router is that the management UI becomes unresponsive - as in, you can't log in to the router to do any configuration work - after it's been running for more than about 24 hours. It still passes traffic, but any attempts to connect to the management UI simply times out after a few minutes. There are forum postings about this problem that date back more than a year. You can't deploy this thing into the field in its current state if you can't remote manage the thing.
So, the first thing I did when I got this router was to update the firmware. The currently shipping firmware DOES NOT fix the above two problems I mentioned. However, if you call the Cisco small biz tech support and describe the problem to them, they will escalate your case and you will be given new, beta firmware that does fix these two problems (you'll have to agree to a beta test contract first).
So, overall, the router is usable AFTER you get the newest beta firmware. It's performance is reasonably fast, and configuration is very easy. It can be remote managed through https, and it even has a local DNS server inside. I don't use VoIP with this particular router, so I can't vouch for that - I've seen forum posts from users whose VoIP services don't work with this router if both WAN connections are in use.
It's disappointing that a company as big as Cisco doesn't act fast enough to fix long-standing problems and release the fixed firmware officially. But, to their credit, they did FINALLY fix the two most annoying problems - even if they do force you into installing beta software.