WRVS4400N vs SR520 vs UC500

[tlsarles0]

Hello,

I am looking to advise a customer on networking 4 offices together. I have used the WRVS4400N for site to site VPNs before, and am quite impressed with the feature set on this router.... so much so, that I can't really find a reason to recommend the SR520 instead. I believe the customer has the money, and would be open to a superior option if we can make a good case for it, so my question is; what can the SR520 do that the WRVS4400N can not? Forget the next day replacement stuff; we could buy a standby WRVS4400N for the difference of upgrading just one to a SR520, so I don't see the value in that.

I was also curious about the routing capabilities of the UC500. Telephony features aside, how does the UC500 series function as a router? I see that the smart designs call for a SR520 to sit between the UC500 and the WAN. I can also understand that if you have a very busy network, that you may want to offload the security and routing functions to a dedicated device from a performance perspective. But lets say we have a small office that is not putting high demands on the network like this, will the UC500 function fine as a VPN endpoint, IPS, Router, and all of the other functions of an SR520, or is the UC500 missing something?

Would also like some figures on maximum throughput on each of these models if possible.

Thanks all!

[tlsarles0]

no difference?

[cchamorr]

Hi Tony, I guess that it all depends on your specific needs.

What I can tell you is that the WRVS4400N is way easier to manage and administer that the other two options, basically, if the WRVS is capable of handling your requierements the UC is absolutelly unnecesary.

The UC is a one man orchestra, but it requieres a different and more especialized kind of support, wich will increase the maintenance cost a lot. For example, I see that you asked about VPN functions. The UC is capable of setup several VPN connections, but you will need to configure it using CLI instead of using a GUI, while on the WRVS4400N you just have to click couple options and are connected.

What I'm trying to say is that the UC may be too much machine for your needs and maybe can be counter productive to get such a powerful device because of the other cost that you will incurr on.

Hope this helped.

[tlsarles0]

I guess what I'm looking for mainly is a sales pitch. Why would someone buy a SR520 over a WRVS? Are there any selling points? Throughput, featureset, or other? I can appriciate the web GUI vs CLI arguement, but I am comfortable with either. Does anyone know where I could find the max throughput on these models, or other hardware specs that set them apart?

[Te-Kai Liu]

I know WRVS4400N can deliver up to 2Mbps VPN throughput.

[tlsarles0]

2Mb :-\ .... I'm going to assume the SR520 is significantly higher? That alone is a good selling point from my perspective

[Steven DiStefano]

The SR520 is part of the SBCS managed by CCA (Smart Business Communications System / Cisco Configuration Assistant).

The UC500 itself has a WAN interface and Firewall and a built in VPN server so if you wanted a voice solution that is customer premis based, the SBCS suite is the Unified Communications solution for you.   The SR520 has FE, ADSL or T1 interface, so it can be placed in front of the UC500 if you wanted to terminate a T1 for example at the host site, but when deploying SIP Trunks for VoIP, the Service Provider usually provides the demarcation router.

The SR520 (FE and ADSL) can also find themselves as teleworker Routers for the UC500, again configurable using the same CCA tool you use on the whole SBCS suite.

If you are considering a hosted managed centrex, then the WRV4400N can work as the customer router, but there again, you may want to consult with the managed SP to see what they provide and what you provide.  The WRVS4400N is not supported in the SBCS suite and you cannot buy SB Pro or Smartnet service on it either.

Steve

SE / Sales