There are countless solutions for managing a network today. pfSense and RouterOS are two systems that turn a computer, server or virtual machine into a data network management server, allowing you to manage the firewall and routing for the entire network. Both systems have carved out a niche in the industry. Below, we will look at the features of each and which would be the right choice.
Mikrotik RouterOS
RouterOS, from Mikrotik, has been the most popular network management system on the market since the 90s. Over time, RouterOS has matured into an industrial-grade routing system, expanding and improving its documentation and user community. System updates are also frequent, unlike those of other systems, some of which take years to release a significant update.
RouterOS is managed through the command line, but you can also manage it using a graphical interface accessed via the web or through the WinBox application.
Screenshot of the WinBox interface for RouterOS
One of the most notable features I have seen in RouterOS is how easily we can manage each workstation's bandwidth, limiting its upload or download speeds in real time with just a few clicks. You can use RouterOS as the access point for your entire network and also manage load balancing across multiple WANs.
Compatibility is one of RouterOS's strengths, allowing it to be deployed with many types of network interfaces. You can also install it on a disk of any size, even one with just 64MB! Its ability to take advantage of computers with multiple cores is also worth highlighting.
Remember that Mikrotik RouterOS is licensed proprietary software, and you will need to pay different prices as you add features to the system.
RouterOS is based on the Linux operating system (kernel 2.6) and is specifically optimized for its own hardware devices, but it is also compatible with third-party hardware and even virtual machines, such as those available through VPS services.
Netgate pfSense
pfSense is a solution based on the FreeBSD operating system with greater flexibility for packet filtering and routing. It supports multiple WAN connections and load balancing. You can create VPNs thanks to its support for OpenVPN and IPSec, and it also supports protocols such as L2TP and PPTP.
pfSense is aimed at those looking for a simple, robust firewall. Since it is based on BSD, it provides more advanced packet filtering, inevitably improving routing and network management. Bear in mind that it may not be compatible with all network adapters. However, if you are using it on a VPS server, this is nothing to worry about.
One of the advantages of pfSense is the ability to deploy third-party extensions. Other advantages include redundancy capabilities, network address translation and extensive DHCP configuration options.
As for requirements, pfSense requires a processor with a minimum frequency of 100MHz, 128MB of RAM and 1GB of disk space.
A very appealing advantage for many is that pfSense is an open-source system that can be freely downloaded from its official website. If you need help, pfSense has a fairly comprehensive discussion forum, but commercial support is also available if you need additional assistance.
pfSense 2.4.4 user interface
Debunking a myth about commercial software
There is a myth in the industry that commercial alternatives offer better security and support. The developers of pfSense maintain that since the project began back in 2004, they have created an alternative that is on a par with any other commercial software.
Another deeply rooted myth is that hardware solutions are better than software alternatives. Nothing could be further from the truth. Much of the “hardware” sold bundled with software is not very different from the x86 machines running any other open-source solution. In fact, many people have replaced the software on proprietary devices with pfSense.
Conclusion
When it comes to choosing a particular system, whether pfSense or Mikrotik, I would say it largely depends on the administrator's experience with each system, as both solutions are very good.
In the case of RouterOS, I would say it is an ideal solution for implementing a robust firewall or subnets. It also lets you easily control the bandwidth allocated to each workstation. It is an expensive option with no scalability when it comes to third-party software.
I would recommend pfSense to those who need a low-budget solution that can be deployed to balance multiple WAN connections, or even if they need many dynamic DNS services such as NoIP. It is also an excellent solution for port forwarding or quality of service. This system also lets you install third-party applications without any problems.
Clouding.io offers a preinstalled pfSense image so you can start managing the system quickly.
Personally, I would choose the latter option. What would you do? What has your experience been?
The author of this article writes for Mejorwebhosting.com, a website featuring reviews and analysis of hosting services.