Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Kenward Vaughan]

On 09/23/2014 12:33 PM, Kurt Buff wrote:

BTW - forgot to make some specific recommendations - I like this switch a lot:
http://www.provantage.com/hewlett-packard-hp-j9803a-aba~7HEWN2JW.htm

Oh - don't forget to get the firmware current on anything you get...

Kurt



It'd be odd to list 11(+) people here, but I have a gold mine of 
information / references for this thanks to the numerous folks who spoke 
up.  I really appreciate everyone's input.


This is a good group.

Thank you!


Kenward



On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Kenward Vaughan  wrote:

Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about trying
to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your answers to what
turned out to be another OT question actually led our IS group to give me
full VPN access to the outside world.  I will be putting a pfSense box on
our end of that connection.  Thanks again for that help!

As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking details, but
do know that sometime in the near future I will be looking for a decent
network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines together into a cluster.
Would anyone have a thought as to a good switch for this?

The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet controller,
if that makes any difference.

Appreciate any thoughts!  Thanks!


Kenward
--
In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
*teachers* and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
could have. - Lee Iacocca

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list




--
In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
*teachers* and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
could have. - Lee Iacocca

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Kurt Buff]

BTW - forgot to make some specific recommendations - I like this switch a lot:
http://www.provantage.com/hewlett-packard-hp-j9803a-aba~7HEWN2JW.htm

Oh - don't forget to get the firmware current on anything you get...

Kurt



On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Kenward Vaughan  wrote:
> Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about trying
> to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your answers to what
> turned out to be another OT question actually led our IS group to give me
> full VPN access to the outside world.  I will be putting a pfSense box on
> our end of that connection.  Thanks again for that help!
>
> As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking details, but
> do know that sometime in the near future I will be looking for a decent
> network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines together into a cluster.
> Would anyone have a thought as to a good switch for this?
>
> The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet controller,
> if that makes any difference.
>
> Appreciate any thoughts!  Thanks!
>
>
> Kenward
> --
> In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
> *teachers* and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
> because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
> ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
> could have. - Lee Iacocca
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[J. Echter]

Am 23.09.2014 19:56, schrieb Chris Bagnall:
> On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:
>> I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.
>
> This.
>
> Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and
> semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make
> sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like
> VLANs, LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never
> use them, a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting
> things like graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which
> can be useful for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.
word
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Kurt Buff]

HP Procurves are a good line of switches, and often come with a full
lifetime warranty. I also like Juniper, but those tend to be more
expensive, although often more capable than the HPs.

It's my policy (as a networking professional) to *always* buy managed
switches. Doing this can give you a great deal of insight into what's
happening on your network - the ability to use SNMP and a span/mirror
port will give you the ability to monitor and diagnose traffic.
Without the management, you'll be at least partially blind, which is
not a good place to reside.

Which switch you get will depend on what your network load will be -
you didn't characterize that in your post, so it's hard to say exactly
what level of performance you need. If all you need is 100mbit for
each machine, getting a fully gigabit capable switch will be overkill,
but if you'll be pushing lots of data between the machines (you did
say "cluster", after all), then getting one that's gigabit across all
ports is a necessity.

Kurt

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Kenward Vaughan  wrote:
> Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about trying
> to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your answers to what
> turned out to be another OT question actually led our IS group to give me
> full VPN access to the outside world.  I will be putting a pfSense box on
> our end of that connection.  Thanks again for that help!
>
> As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking details, but
> do know that sometime in the near future I will be looking for a decent
> network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines together into a cluster.
> Would anyone have a thought as to a good switch for this?
>
> The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet controller,
> if that makes any difference.
>
> Appreciate any thoughts!  Thanks!
>
>
> Kenward
> --
> In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
> *teachers* and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
> because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
> ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
> could have. - Lee Iacocca
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Stefan Baur]

Am 23.09.2014 um 20:56 schrieb Chris Bagnall:
> Be careful which model you get. Some of the newer/cheaper ones that have
> been sold as 'managed' recently don't have a web interface. They have
> some horrible management application that uses Adobe Air, only works on
> Windows, only communicates with switches on the same broadcast domain
> (so useless for any sort of routed environment) and is generally rubbish.

... and broadcasts the password in plain text. No kidding.

If you have a Windows machine where you can install the admin tool, and
you don't have to access the management interface while other devices
are plugged in (i.e. you're planning a static VLAN setup and an
interruption of service to reprogram the switch is okay for you), then
you can buy those, too.  Just beware of these ugly limitations.

The five-port model (GS105E) is nice as long as you can deal with the
limitations. Gigabit, compact form factor, nice to have in your admin
laptop bag, for example. There are even mods to run it from a battery pack.

-Stefan
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Chris Bagnall]

On 23/9/14 7:44 pm, Espen Johansen wrote:

A netgear pro switch


Be careful which model you get. Some of the newer/cheaper ones that have 
been sold as 'managed' recently don't have a web interface. They have 
some horrible management application that uses Adobe Air, only works on 
Windows, only communicates with switches on the same broadcast domain 
(so useless for any sort of routed environment) and is generally rubbish.


If you get one of the older FS72x/75x models, I think you're okay - it's 
the newer J ones that seem to have this 'feature'.


Kind regards,

Chris
--
This email is made from 100% recycled electrons
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Espen Johansen]

Just for the record. All the 3com stuff is actually huawei/3com (h3c) and
afaik all the black switches are still that tech. 3600 5500 5700 5800 5900
7500 10500 series are all that and run a ios descendant from Huawei. And
they rock if you bother to learn them. They are way better then the cisco
equivalent and cheaper.

As for the Q you had originally.  A netgear pro switch or cisco linksys
switches would do fine. Get a managed one of some sort. The web managed
ones will get you the basics.
If you want something good and cheap buy a used cisco 3560g or 2960g.

-lsf
23. sep. 2014 20:05 skrev "Adam Thompson"  følgende:

> +1 for HP ProCurve, except for the stuff they inherited from 3Com...
> I've also had reasonably good luck with Netgear and D-Link managed
> switches.
> The Cisco SMB stuff seems OK hardware-wise, but the software is
> questionable.
> Note that all three of these options come with lifetime, free, firmware
> updates.
> -Adam
>
> On September 23, 2014 12:56:00 PM CDT, Chris Bagnall <
> pfse...@lists.minotaur.cc> wrote:
>>
>> On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:
>>
>>>  I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.
>>>
>>
>> This.
>>
>> Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and
>> semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make
>> sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like VLANs,
>> LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never use them,
>> a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting things like
>> graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which can be useful
>> for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.
>>
>>  I've
>>>  had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the
>>> ZyXel
>>>  GS1900 range.
>>>
>>
>> One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24 port
>> PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.
>>
>> I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market,
>> something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to
>> the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI.
>> I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com units
>> after the HP/3Com buyout.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Josh Reynolds]

Interesting that I would see Ubiquiti pop up on this list.

I am Josh_SPITwSPOTS on that forum...
http://community.ubnt.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/108998

TheGUI and CLI are a mess. Thatsaid, they are stable, but if you don't 
need 24vpassive POE, and/or 802.3at/af, then the HP has better 
management options and a fully supported SNMP stack. I'm sure the 
edgeswich line will get there, but I wouldn't recommended it outside of 
WISP use (or needed lots of POE) just yet.


Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com 

On 09/23/2014 10:26 AM, Michael Bubb wrote:
I agree with the point that managed vs nonmanaged price difference is 
negligible so why not managed...


Ubiquiti is worth a look for this application. The OS is nice to work 
with and has both CLI and GUI


http://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch/

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Adam Thompson > wrote:


+1 for HP ProCurve, except for the stuff they inherited from 3Com...
I've also had reasonably good luck with Netgear and D-Link managed
switches.
The Cisco SMB stuff seems OK hardware-wise, but the software is
questionable.
Note that all three of these options come with lifetime, free,
firmware updates.
-Adam


On September 23, 2014 12:56:00 PM CDT, Chris Bagnall
mailto:pfse...@lists.minotaur.cc>> wrote:

On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:

I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP. 



This.

Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and
semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make
sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like VLANs,
LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never use them,
a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting things like
graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which can be useful
for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.

I've had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB
switches and the ZyXel GS1900 range. 



One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24 port
PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.

I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market,
something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to
the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI.
I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com units
after the HP/3Com buyout.

Kind regards,

Chris


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org 
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list




--
Michael Bubb   +1.646.783.8769 | KD2DTY
Resume - http://mbubb.github.io/res/resume.html

*noli timere*



___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list


___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Michael Bubb]

I agree with the point that managed vs nonmanaged price difference is
negligible so why not managed...

Ubiquiti is worth a look for this application. The OS is nice to work with
and has both CLI and GUI

http://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch/

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Adam Thompson 
wrote:

> +1 for HP ProCurve, except for the stuff they inherited from 3Com...
> I've also had reasonably good luck with Netgear and D-Link managed
> switches.
> The Cisco SMB stuff seems OK hardware-wise, but the software is
> questionable.
> Note that all three of these options come with lifetime, free, firmware
> updates.
> -Adam
>
>
> On September 23, 2014 12:56:00 PM CDT, Chris Bagnall <
> pfse...@lists.minotaur.cc> wrote:
>>
>> On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:
>>
>>>  I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.
>>>
>>
>> This.
>>
>> Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and
>> semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make
>> sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like VLANs,
>> LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never use them,
>> a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting things like
>> graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which can be useful
>> for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.
>>
>>  I've
>>>  had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the
>>> ZyXel
>>>  GS1900 range.
>>>
>>
>> One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24 port
>> PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.
>>
>> I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market,
>> something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to
>> the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI.
>> I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com units
>> after the HP/3Com buyout.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>



-- 
Michael Bubb   +1.646.783.8769 | KD2DTY
Resume - http://mbubb.github.io/res/resume.html

 *noli timere*
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] HPET timer issues?

[Jim Pingle]

On 9/23/2014 12:34 PM, Moshe Katz wrote:
> 1. Has anyone else seen this behavior?

The only HPET issue I'm aware of is on older versions of ESX where the
clock would completely stop ticking. That's been patched for a long time
now though.

> 2. I haven't noticed any performance issues after the switch, but is
> there anything that I need to be concerned about?

If you're not noticing any other side effects it's probably OK.

Check for a BIOS update or relevant BIOS setting, though it's probably
just something specific to that bit of hardware.

Jim

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Adam Thompson]

+1 for HP ProCurve, except for the stuff they inherited from 3Com...
I've also had reasonably good luck with Netgear and D-Link managed switches.
The Cisco SMB stuff seems OK hardware-wise, but the software is questionable.
Note that all three of these options come with lifetime, free, firmware updates.
-Adam

On September 23, 2014 12:56:00 PM CDT, Chris Bagnall 
 wrote:
>On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:
>> I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.
>
>This.
>
>Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and 
>semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make 
>sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like VLANs,
>
>LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never use them,
>
>a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting things
>like 
>graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which can be useful
>
>for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.
>
>> I've
>> had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the ZyXel
>> GS1900 range.
>
>One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24
>port 
>PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.
>
>I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market, 
>something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to 
>the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI. 
>I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com units
>
>after the HP/3Com buyout.
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Chris
>-- 
>This email is made from 100% recycled electrons
>___
>List mailing list
>List@lists.pfsense.org
>https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Josh Reynolds]

The 1910's ARE rebranded 3com, but I found them to be very reliable.

We are having good luck with the 2530's right now.

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com 

On 09/23/2014 09:56 AM, Chris Bagnall wrote:

On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:

I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.


This.

Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and 
semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make 
sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like 
VLANs, LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never 
use them, a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting 
things like graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which 
can be useful for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.



I've
had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the ZyXel
GS1900 range.


One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24 
port PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.


I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market, 
something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to 
the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI. 
I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com 
units after the HP/3Com buyout.


Kind regards,

Chris


___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Chris Bagnall]

On 23/9/14 6:46 pm, RB wrote:

I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.


This.

Given how small the price difference often is between unmanaged and 
semi-managed (aka 'smart') switches these days, it just doesn't make 
sense to buy unmanaged any more. You never know when things like VLANs, 
LLDP and LACP might just come in handy, and even if you never use them, 
a managed switch will also allow you to do other interesting things like 
graph per-port (and sometimes per-port-VLAN) usage, which can be useful 
for detecting misbehaving network hardware elsewhere.



I've
had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the ZyXel
GS1900 range.


One of our clients uses the Zyxel switches to good effect. Their 24 port 
PoE versions are certainly competitively priced.


I tend to use HP where possible. At the lower cost end of the market, 
something like the 1810-24G (web managed) is a good bet, or move up to 
the 2510/2520 if you need more management functionality and/or a CLI. 
I've avoided the 1910 range; AIUI they're basically rebadged 3Com units 
after the HP/3Com buyout.


Kind regards,

Chris
--
This email is made from 100% recycled electrons
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[RB]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Moshe Katz  wrote:
> If you don't need to do any fancy routing or VLAN stuff, just go on Amazon
> or NewEgg and get the top-rated 16-port unmanaged gigabit switch.


I would slightly disagree - note that it's a compute cluster and that
the machines have dual NIC ports.  If the cluster's application is
network-heavy or needs each host to have a highly-available network
link, I'd suggest at least a managed switch that can do LACP.  I've
had decent results with the Linksys/Cisco SMB switches and the ZyXel
GS1900 range.

If one NIC is okay, any unmanaged 16-port will do.  If dual links are
required, I'd suggest either a trio of 16s (two access and one core
that's dual-linked to the access switches) or a single 24 if
redundancy isn't a concern.
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[David Ross]

On 9/23/14, 1:36 PM, Moshe Katz wrote:

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Kenward Vaughan mailto:kay_...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about
trying to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your
answers to what turned out to be another OT question actually led
our IS group to give me full VPN access to the outside world.  I
will be putting a pfSense box on our end of that connection.  Thanks
again for that help!

As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking
details, but do know that sometime in the near future I will be
looking for a decent network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines
together into a cluster.  Would anyone have a thought as to a good
switch for this?

The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet
controller, if that makes any difference.

If you don't need to do any fancy routing or VLAN stuff, just go on
Amazon or NewEgg and get the top-rated 16-port /unmanaged/ gigabit switch.

If you don't need fully managed I'd look for one a step up from fully 
un-managed. I'd look for one with a Web interface so you can at least 
see error rates and what MAC addresses are flowing through what ports. A 
few $$$ more but worth it every year or two.


David
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Moshe Katz]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Kenward Vaughan 
wrote:

> Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about trying
> to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your answers to what
> turned out to be another OT question actually led our IS group to give me
> full VPN access to the outside world.  I will be putting a pfSense box on
> our end of that connection.  Thanks again for that help!
>
> As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking details,
> but do know that sometime in the near future I will be looking for a decent
> network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines together into a cluster.
> Would anyone have a thought as to a good switch for this?
>
> The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet
> controller, if that makes any difference.
>
> Appreciate any thoughts!  Thanks!
>
>
> Kenward
>

If you don't need to do any fancy routing or VLAN stuff, just go on Amazon
or NewEgg and get the top-rated 16-port *unmanaged* gigabit switch.

Moshe

--
Moshe Katz
-- mo...@ymkatz.net
-- +1(301)867-3732
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] OT: Good network switch for 10 machines?

[Kenward Vaughan]

Sorry about the topic, but when I had asked a question before about 
trying to tie into a wireless network through a pfSense box, your 
answers to what turned out to be another OT question actually led our IS 
group to give me full VPN access to the outside world.  I will be 
putting a pfSense box on our end of that connection.  Thanks again for 
that help!


As was apparent in that post I am pretty ignorant of networking details, 
but do know that sometime in the near future I will be looking for a 
decent network switch to tie 10-11 dual cpu machines together into a 
cluster.  Would anyone have a thought as to a good switch for this?


The machines will have the Intel i210 Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet 
controller, if that makes any difference.


Appreciate any thoughts!  Thanks!


Kenward
--
In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
*teachers* and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
could have. - Lee Iacocca

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] HPET timer issues?

[Moshe Katz]

Hello all,

Last night, I set up a new pfSense box running on what is either a Pentium
Dual-Core or a Core 2 Duo (different software check identify it
differently, for some reason) with a dual-port Intel (em) card.

I was monitoring it, and I found that the CPU usage (percentage) never went
below 50%, and the load average never dropped below 1.  This was true even
when very little traffic was coming through.  I looked around a bot and
found that a very large number of interrupts were coming in from hpet0.
Based on
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2012-June/068126.html, I
set the system timer to LAPIC, and the load now looks much more like what I
expect it to be.

My question is two-fold:

1. Has anyone else seen this behavior?

2. I haven't noticed any performance issues after the switch, but is there
anything that I need to be concerned about?

Thanks,
Moshe

--
Moshe Katz
-- mo...@ymkatz.net
-- +1(301)867-3732
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] CARP-user

[Vick Khera]

I think you're confusing CARP with configuration sync to remote node.

CARP works in the kernel and does not have a "user". The pfSync state
sync also does not have a user. Only the config sync has a user.

If you login with that user name on the backup node, can you perform
all configuration actions via the GUI?


On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Martin Fuchs  wrote:
> Hi !
>
>
>
> Does anyone have experience on CARP setup with a different user than „admin“
> ?
>
>
>
> Is there the possibility to create another user and use that for CARP ?
>
>
>
> I did not manage to get it working…
>
> Created user „CARPsync“ with „admin“ group-membership (and shell access) and
> set CARP up to use this user.
>
> It did not snc anything and i only got auth-errors…
>
>
>
> Any ideas ?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> martin
>
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] CARP-user

[Martin Fuchs]

Hi !

 

Does anyone have experience on CARP setup with a different user than "admin"
?

 

Is there the possibility to create another user and use that for CARP ?

 

I did not manage to get it working.

Created user "CARPsync" with "admin" group-membership (and shell access) and
set CARP up to use this user.

It did not snc anything and i only got auth-errors.

 

Any ideas ?

 

Regards,

martin

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list