Synology DSM vs Mikrotik, soft router as the basis of a home network?

Question

Computer networks

I am assembling a home network based on an HP Microserver Gen8 server + a router from Huawei Rostelecom using optics.
Proxmox 4.4 + VM Xpenology is spinning inside.
Task:
1. Organize a complete house. network with all the goodies - vpn, dhcp, dns, stable internet. Feng shui but without fanaticism.
2. Portability of a piece of iron. in eth0 we stick a wire with any Internet , in eth1 we issue addresses to the switch - everyone is happy.
Suggested scheme:
According to the example https://habrahabr.ru/post/119257/, i.e. + dev labs and stuff ( often remote work )
Current issues:
The Rostelecom box sometimes stops distributing the Internet, it is treated only with the reset button. Runs incredibly. I wanted to get rid of it with the help of a soft router, i.e. pppoe themselves + if there is no Internet for a minute - it will reconnect.
There are two questions:
1. Does it make sense to install Mikrotic OS separately or will DSM handle it perfectly?
There is everything like - dhcp, pppoe, dns, vpn. How good is it there? Or is it better not to worry and trust Mikrotik?
2. What is the best way to organize external access? To be honest I can't decide
Why the question arose: it’s not clear what to do if, for example, everything fell due to a power outage and needs to be repaired remotely - the probability of this is extremely small, as a last resort I’ll come to fix it in the evening. What if I'm on a business trip? but the glitch vm router (?) or KVM is more real? Or is this also unlikely and not worth steaming?
I see the following options (practice 0, so only fantasy):
a. It doesn't matter - through vpn we go into the internal. grid and get access to everything you need.
b. to iLO via an external router. does it roll over normally? I read somewhere that there are problems with the console
in. to DSM/Mikrotik via an external router.
b and c will not allow you to solve the problem with the lack of an Internet (see above)
How correct is it to directly give access to iLO?
more options? Maybe everything is easier to do and I'm very tired? Who is organized?

Answer 1

To take a mikrotik piece of iron, and everything else for it, is more reliable, and it will be clear what is happening with traffic. He knows how to reboot himself, and there are scripts for reconnecting. VPN is also set up on it

Answer 2

If there is an iron microt, it is better to use it, if not, I would put it in the form of a pfsense virtual machine. It is better not to expose iLO to the Internet. In case of freezes - watchdog. Well, a reliable uninterruptible power supply for a microserver will not hurt, preferably with control at least via usb / com to pay off in the event of a long absence of electricity.

Answer 3

For a long time I had everything on one host - FreeBSD (which worked as a router), and a server, and test machines. This scheme is good when you are constantly at home and are able to raise a fallen FreeBSD in a couple of clicks, which constantly writes about software inconsistency after a power failure. When you are not at home, you have to involve an unskilled child: D
Therefore, I decided for myself this way - a microtic (hardware, box), and only a microtic. I have a server from the category of "self-server", iLO is not in it, if I had it - I would not put it on the tyrnet. Mikrotik perfectly holds and turns and IPSec VPN to work, the power is gone - there is no connection. There was power - the Mikrotik turned on, I went to the FreeBSD console, gave it a prophylactic pendel ...
Hardware Mikrotik in your case gives a guarantee that it will be possible to get to iLO, and restart the server from it, if necessary. DSM... well, of course there is linux, mc can be stirred up there, and packages are installed... but I would separate with Mikrotik, and leave DSM inside the network. If you need to go directly to DSM - there is a DS Cloud Client that allows file sharing - it will be like a small dropbox :)