I've been using a Cisco 871 for 8 years now, and I found it to be an excellent router for my home. Recently I upgraded my Internet connection from 25 Mbps/5 Mbps to 50 Mbps/11 Mbps. When I connect my MacBook Pro directly to the cable modem with a CAT5e cable, I get 55 Mbps down and 11 Mbps up. When I connect my MacBook Pro directly to an interface on the Cisco 871, the most I get is 27.5 Mbps down and 11 Mbps up. So, the download bandwidth is clearly reduced with the Cisco 871 being between the cable modem and my MacBook Pro. So, I cleared the WAN interface on my Cisco 871 (FastEthernet 4) and did a "show interface fast 4" command. The output is here: WAN_VPN#show int fast 4 FastEthernet4 is up, line protocol is up   Hardware is PQUICC_FEC, address is "X"   Description: WAN INTERFACE   Internet address is "Y"   MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100000 Kbit/sec, DLY 100 usec,      reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255   Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set"  Keepalive set (10 sec)   Full-duplex, 100Mb/s, 100BaseTX/FX   ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00   Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never   Last clearing of "show interface" counters 00:00:20   Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0   Queueing strategy: fifo   Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)   30 second input rate 122000 bits/sec, 16 packets/sec   30 second output rate 7000 bits/sec, 5 packets/sec      176 packets input, 13865 bytes      Received 155 broadcasts (0 IP multicasts)      0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles      0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored      0 watchdog      0 input packets with dribble condition detected      46 packets output, 8658 bytes, 0 underruns      0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets      0 unknown protocol drops      0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred      0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier      0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out This looked fine. Then, I did a speed test from speedtest.net. As soon as the download test completed (and the upload speed test had not yet commenced), I issued another "show interface fast 4" command, and here what I saw: WAN_VPN#show int fast 4 FastEthernet4 is up, line protocol is up   Hardware is PQUICC_FEC, address is "X"   Description: WAN INTERFACE   Internet address is "Y"   MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100000 Kbit/sec, DLY 100 usec,      reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 33/255   Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set   Keepalive set (10 sec)   Full-duplex, 100Mb/s, 100BaseTX/FX   ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00   Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never   Last clearing of "show interface" counters 00:00:51   Input queue: 0/75/29/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0   Queueing strategy: fifo   Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)   30 second input rate 13110000 bits/sec, 1093 packets/sec   30 second output rate 165000 bits/sec, 302 packets/sec      43181 packets input, 64567366 bytes      Received 395 broadcasts (0 IP multicasts)      0 runts, 0 giants, 55 throttles      58 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 58 ignored      0 watchdog      0 input packets with dribble condition detected      11883 packets output, 814636 bytes, 0 underruns      0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets      0 unknown protocol drops      0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred      0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier      0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out This router's WAN interface (FastEthernet 4) is a 10/100 Mbps interface. I've been running it in auto/auto, but once I saw the input errors and the throttles, I tried to hard set it to 100/full. The result was that I saw throttles, input errors, but also CRC errors and frame errors. So, I now set it back to auto/auto. As soon as I run a speed test from www.speedtest.net, I get the throttles and the input errors. I cannot control what the cable modem's interface is set to - it's configuraiton page does not allow one to change settings on the interface. The cable modem is Motorola Surfboard SB6121 (DOCSIS 3) modem. So, can someone explain what the throttles are and why they are present? Are input errors caused by the throttles or vice versa? Why am I getting these erorrs? The physical interface speed is 100 Mbps, but the most I'm able to pull from my cable modem is perhaps 60 Mbps, so why the throttles?  Finally, is it possible that I've exceeded the capacity of this router to handle traffic (in Mbps or Packets per second)? I also have an ASA5505 (still sitting in a box). If the problem is that my ISP speeds now exceed the capabilities of the Cisco 871, would replacing it with the ASA5505 resolve this issue? Is ASA5505 capable of handling ~50 Mbps down and ~10 Mbps up? Thank you! ... View more

I am trying to come up with the best way to connect remote (teleworker) phones to my client's UC560. I was under the impression that any IP phones supported by UC500 could be used as remote phones. When I was trying to configure a remote phone using the SSL VPN (remote phone) feature, I realized that currently only SPA525G and SPA525G2 phones are supported as remote teleworker phones using SSL VPN. The IP phones that my client has deployed in the office are Cisco 7965 phones. So, I'd like to make sure that I understand the options that my client and I have for bringing teleworkers into his voice system. In my opinion, the options are: 1. Purchase SPA525G2 phones and use the UC560 Remote Phone Wizard to configure the UC500 and the SPA525G2 phones for the remote phone feature. 2. Purchase routers to terminate the EZVPN tunnels between each teleworker router and the UC560. Then plug existing Cisco 7965 phones behind the teleworker routers. 3. Try to configure the UC560 from CLI for SSL VPN and load the firmware on 7965 phones that supports SSL VPN. This is the most laborious option of the three with questionable success chances. I will be recommending the first two options to my client. Does anyone know what routers are supported for Option 2 of the options listed above? I know that Cisco recommends SR520, which are supported by CCA. Are Cisco 800 series routers supported? Can CCA configure Cisco 800 series routers? Are there any routers that use GUI configuration that support EZVPN tunnel termination? My client has an IT person on staff without much knowledge of CLI, and I would rather him use a GUI driven router so that he can provision new teleworkers without having to resort to my help in the future. Does anyone know when the next release of UC500 series software pack is coming out, and if it contains support for SSL VPN in Cisco 7900 series IP phones? Final question, if one teleworker uses the SPA525G2 phone as a remote phone (using the SSL VPN tunnel terminated by UC500) and the VPN Client software (used for data and also terminated by UC560), will these count as two VPN tunnels for each teleworker against the maximum of 20 VPN tunnels total allowed by CCA with UC560? Or are only SSL VPN tunnels counted against this maximum (due to licensing restrictions)? Thanks! ... View more

Originally, my  client had SG300-28 (purchased by mistake) instead of SG300-28p. I had  configured SG300-28 from CLI and CCA (CCA is a requirement for the Small  Business Pro department to support the voice solution). I then tftp'ed  the config to my laptop. When I replaced SG300-28 with SG300-28p, I  upgraded the firmware that came with it (pre 1.1.8) to firmware 1.2.0.  Then, I tftp'ed the config from my laptop to the SG300-28p startup  configuration and reloaded the switch. After the reload, I was not able  to regain IP connectivity to the switch, and I had to use the console  cable to get into the switch to see what happened. What I saw was the IP  address originally assigned to interface VLAN 101 in the SG300-28 config being assigned to interface VLAN1 in the newly installed SG300-28p. Therefore, I had to remove that IP from interface VLAN1 and put it under interface VLAN101 while being connected to the switch via a console cable. A  few days later, I realized that the ip default-gateway command  that I had configured in SG300-28 and had saved in the config on my  laptop, did not take when I tftp'ed the config to SG300-28p. So, even  though I was able to administer the switch from a laptop connected to  one of the switche's ports, I could not administer it via a VPN  connection. I have confirmed that the cofig file on my laptop has the correct configuration, and this must mean that the configuration created  in SG300-28 running firmware 1.1.8 does not play nicely with SG300-28p  running firmware 1.2.0. I hope these are just some growing pains because a firmware upgrade messing with the existing good configuration is a disaster scenario. I think this deserves being brought up here for the Small Business Pro folks to investigate this issue and correct it in the next firmware upgrade. ... View more

With the new firmware (1.1.2.0) released for SG200 switches, is there CLI now? Thanks! ... View more