On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:20:23AM +0200, Doggie wrote: > W dniu 2017-07-25 o 19:39, Peter J. Philipp pisze: > > Actually I bought the silent fans. So I don't have to write any code, > > too bad the foxconn fans are a misdesign. I'll maintenance this router > > next week for the new fans. I'm putting it into production at home > > tomorrow though. > > Thanks for all the details, Peter, and good luck during next steps of your > project. > > I wonder how fast the NIC's will be - using this CPU and still no hardware > acceleration. > > If you ever want to replace the fans again, I have been having very good > experience with Noctua devices (http://noctua.at/en/products/fan). The folks > at the company do know what "silence" means.
Thanks for the hint on the fans. I have been putting the ER-8 into production today. Here is what I found: 1. named doesn't work right, it SIGBUS'es around what I ktraced as kbind() issues most likely. I used the working config file from my APU that was replace by this router. Recompiling named without threads starts the daemon but it behaves weirdly and doesn't do anything (SERVFAIL). 2. The router is pretty snappy but I did a speed test and it resulted in 67 Mbps download from my 100 Mbit link. While I'm ok with that, it's slower than my old APU1 that I replaced with this thing. Now in all fairness when I download it must be calculated as 4 times 67 Mbps of what the router is capable of. Because after I recieve the download on cnmac1/pppoe0 I send it out cnmac2 to a NUC that IPSEC's the download and sends it back into cnmac2, then it gets routed out cnmac4 to my other computers. So in aggregate it's 268 Mbit/s that's going through the router. While I was doing this I observed the CPU at 75% so it may have allowed a bit more but not much more. Hope that gives you more information. If I had the choice to get it again I'd think a bit longer. -peter
