Abstract

The New Branch-Office Routers

This August 1994 Data Communications lab test, conducted by Kevin Tolly of The Tolly Group and David Newman of Data Communications, evaluated whether a new generation of branch-office routers could deliver effective remote management for geographically distributed enterprise networks. The test focused less on raw routing throughput and more on operational realities: whether central-site network managers could configure, monitor, update, reboot, and troubleshoot routers at remote offices without dispatching technical staff to each location.

The lab invited 12 branch-office router vendors to participate. Eight vendors supplied products for evaluation: Advanced Computer Communications’ Nile, Cisco Systems’ Cisco 2500, Digital Equipment Corp.’s DECbrouter 90 T2, IBM’s RouteXpander/2, Proteon’s ProNet DNX 350, RND Technologies’ OG-RAN, 3Com’s NetBuilder Remote Office router, and Wellfleet Communications’ Access Node. The article also notes that CXR/Telcom, LDI, Microcom, and Netlink were invited but declined to participate.

Testing centered on branch-office manageability. The lab used a central-site configuration with Ethernet or token-ring LANs, WAN links, and management workstations. Testers assessed whether each router could be installed and configured remotely, whether software and configuration files could be downloaded from the central site, how the products behaved after WAN failures or power failures, and whether managers could monitor or modify the routers using SNMP, Telnet, BOOTP/TFTP, vendor utilities, or other remote-management tools. The test also examined supported routed protocols, LAN and WAN interface choices, filtering capabilities, and the practical burden placed on administrators during deployment and recovery.

Cisco’s 2500 earned a Data Communications “Tester’s Choice” designation because its IOS-based routing software was considered mature, broad, and reliable. The article highlighted Cisco’s support for multiple routed protocols, strong filtering, extensive routing capabilities, and solid remote-configuration tools, while noting that the product’s command-line configuration could be complex. 3Com also received a “Tester’s Choice” for its NetBuilder Remote Office product, praised for strong remote control, dual boot images, and the ability to recover from failed software downloads without requiring a field visit. Wellfleet’s Access Node received a “Tester’s Choice” as well, with the article citing ease of configuration, good remote-management tools, and strong support for multiprotocol branch-office use.

The other products showed a wide range of strengths and limitations. ACC’s Nile offered broad WAN and protocol support but relied heavily on external configuration tools. DEC’s DECbrouter 90 T2 provided useful bridge/router functions but had limitations in remote configuration and recovery. IBM’s RouteXpander/2 was designed as a lower-cost, simple branch router but required local intervention for some updates. Proteon’s ProNet DNX 350 provided token-ring-oriented routing and multiprotocol support, but the lab found management and recovery less straightforward. RND’s OG-RAN combined bridge/router capabilities in a compact branch-office device, while 3Com’s broader NetBuilder family emphasized centralized control and software-image resilience.

Overall, the lab concluded that branch-office routers were becoming capable enough for enterprise remote-site deployment, but that remote management varied dramatically by vendor. The best products reduced the need for branch-office technical staff by supporting centralized configuration, remote software updates, automatic restart after failures, protocol filtering, and survivable boot-image strategies. The article’s broader conclusion was that manageability, not just routing performance or purchase price, was the key differentiator for distributed enterprise routing in 1994.

Solutions Tested

Advanced Computer Communications — Nile
Cisco Systems — Cisco 2500
Digital Equipment Corp. — DECbrouter 90 T2
IBM — RouteXpander/2
Proteon — ProNet DNX 350
RND Technologies — OG-RAN
3Com — NetBuilder Remote Office 223
Wellfleet Communications — Access Node