On 05/08/2013 9:10 am, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a
home
router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/lis
load but if do not plan such high speeds it work like
charm..Kind of expensive though...
Peter
On 08/05/2013 17:10, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
> What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
> router/firewall? (needs to have 2
On 05/08/13 15:48, Arthur Chance wrote:
On 05/08/13 15:10, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
I use an alix2d3 running embedded pfSense as a 3 NIC (WAN, LAN, DMZ)
router. If you only
On 05/08/13 15:10, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
I use an alix2d3 running embedded pfSense as a 3 NIC (WAN, LAN, DMZ)
router. If you only need 2 NICs go for the alix2d2. You can
Op 8 mei 2013 om 16:24 heeft "C. P. Ghost" het volgende
geschreven:
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:10 PM, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
>> router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
>
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:10 PM, firm...@gmail.com wrote:
> What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
> router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
>
I had some pretty good experiences with older Soekris models (net-4801)
acting as fanless routers and
What is the best option out there for a mini-pc to run FreeBSD as a home
router/firewall? (needs to have 2 nic's)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any ma
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:25:46 -0400, Joe wrote:
> Is there some format of the service command that could be used to
> manually start the selected firewall?
How about the rc.d framework?
# /etc/rc.d/ipfw start
Or
# service ipfw start
Both will honor the firewall_type= s
Le Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:25:46 -0400,
Joe a écrit :
Hello,
> I have special purpose situation where I need to wait until the boot
> process has completed the starting of the system and then start the
> firewall (ipfw or pf). Commenting out the firewall statements from
> the hosts
Joe writes:
> I have special purpose situation where I need to wait until the boot
> process has completed the starting of the system and then start the
> firewall (ipfw or pf). Commenting out the firewall statements from the
> hosts /etc/rc.conf does stop the firewall from
I have special purpose situation where I need to wait until the boot
process has completed the starting of the system and then start the
firewall (ipfw or pf). Commenting out the firewall statements from the
hosts /etc/rc.conf does stop the firewall from starting at boot time.
Is there some
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:00:27 -0400 (EDT), Darrel wrote:
when i updated from fbsd82 to fbsd90 using buildworld, buildkernel,
installkernel, reboot, installworld, mergemaster, and make check-old, then
packet filter simply did not load.
That's nmot 100% the
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:00:27 -0400 (EDT), Darrel wrote:
> when i updated from fbsd82 to fbsd90 using buildworld, buildkernel,
> installkernel, reboot, installworld, mergemaster, and make check-old, then
> packet filter simply did not load.
That's nmot 100% the procedure. Please refer to the comm
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Andreas Rudisch wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 23:41:44 -0400 (EDT)
Darrel wrote:
Packet Filter does not work
Hi,
you might want to give more information other than that.
when i updated from fbsd82 to fbsd90 using buildworld, buildkernel,
installkernel, reboot, installw
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Fbsd8 wrote:
Darrel wrote:
Hello,
When I moved from -fbsd82 to -fbsd90 it required a total reinstall since
Packet Filter did not *work* any longer. Now that I have moved from
-fbsd90 to the new release candidate, Packet Filter does not work
considering at least IPv6 an
Darrel wrote:
Hello,
When I moved from -fbsd82 to -fbsd90 it required a total reinstall since
Packet Filter did not *work* any longer. Now that I have moved from
-fbsd90 to the new release candidate, Packet Filter does not work
considering at least IPv6 and ssh.
I have tested a simple pf.c
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 23:41:44 -0400 (EDT)
Darrel wrote:
> Packet Filter does not work
Hi,
you might want to give more information other than that.
Andreas
--
GnuPG key : 0x2A573565|http://www.gnupg.org/howtos/de/
Fingerprint: 925D 2089 0BF9 8DE5 9166 33BB F0FD CD37 2A57 3565
_
Hello,
When I moved from -fbsd82 to -fbsd90 it required a total reinstall since
Packet Filter did not *work* any longer. Now that I have moved from
-fbsd90 to the new release candidate, Packet Filter does not work
considering at least IPv6 and ssh.
I have tested a simple pf.conf on this sys
I have another problem . >_<
Sometimes , I cannot connect to server ( in trust zone ) from untrust.
Even I turn off the firewall, the situation still come up.
But, when the state appears, I ping some ip from the server ( in trust
) to a host ( in untrust ).
Suddenly, I connect
> 2012/6/20 Erik Osterholm :
>
>
> Try adding logging to the rules, enable pflog, and see which rule is blocking.
>
> Erik
hmm
I discovered some things from log.
Even if the packet hit a rule ( pass in quick on bridge0 ) , the
packet still is blocked by block out rule ( block out on brid
I have some trouble with pf on freebsd bridge.
Network topology:
( untrust ) -- { em0 , bridge0 , em1 } -- ( trust )
Bridge Network: 10.1.1.0/24
bridge0 IP: 10.1.1.1 ( freebsd's ip )
default gw: 10.1.1.254 ( in untrust area )
server: 10.1.1.101 ~ 200 ( in trust area )
pf.conf on freebsd
serv1
At 07:18 PM 5/30/2012, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> From jbiq...@intranet.com.mx Wed May 30 13:48:05 2012
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:47:34 -0500
> To: Robert Bonomi
> From: Jorge Biquez
> Subject: Re: Firewall, blocking POP3
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>
> Hello.
&
> From jbiq...@intranet.com.mx Wed May 30 13:48:05 2012
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:47:34 -0500
> To: Robert Bonomi
> From: Jorge Biquez
> Subject: Re: Firewall, blocking POP3
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>
> Hello.
>
> Thanks a lot!. Simple an elegant sol
See /usr/ports/security/py-fail2ban (http://www.fail2ban.org/). Used
in conjunction with FreeBSD's ipfw or pf firewall facility, you can
ban an attacking IP address for a set period of time after a
configurable amount of failed attempts. Fail2ban watches your log
files for you and then tri
Bonomi wrote:
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Wed May 30 13:16:37 2012
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:08:30 -0500
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> From: Jorge Biquez
> Cc:
> Subject: Firewall, blocking POP3
>
> Hello all.
>
> I am sorry if the quest
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Wed May 30 13:16:37 2012
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:08:30 -0500
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> From: Jorge Biquez
> Cc:
> Subject: Firewall, blocking POP3
>
> Hello all.
>
> I am sorry if the question is too basi
so no problem on that but I rather
to be sure .
I was thinking on the following options.
- Stopping the service, port 110 to respond and open it everytime I
want to download email.
- Install a firewall and block all the IP's but they are trying from
a lot different ones.
- Maybe changin
There's also web available manuals for probably every release of OpenBSD here:
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=pf.conf&manpath=OpenBSD+4.5
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.fre
rg
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] På vegne af Fbsd8
> Sendt: den 16 april 2012 04:31
> Til: FreeBSD Questions; FreeBSD Current; FreeBSD doc
> Emne: Re: pf firewall and ftp
>
> Fbsd8 wrote:
> > Running 9.0 as a gateway host with pf firewall enabled.
> > FTP i
Til: FreeBSD Questions; FreeBSD Current; FreeBSD doc
Emne: Re: pf firewall and ftp
Fbsd8 wrote:
> Running 9.0 as a gateway host with pf firewall enabled.
> FTP is launched by inetd.
> Both active and passive ftp works from lan pc's to the host ftp.
> The lan ftp session can be initia
Fbsd8 wrote:
Running 9.0 as a gateway host with pf firewall enabled.
FTP is launched by inetd.
Both active and passive ftp works from lan pc's to the host ftp.
The lan ftp session can be initiated from the host or any lan pc and
things work because there are no rules on the lan interface e
Running 9.0 as a gateway host with pf firewall enabled.
FTP is launched by inetd.
Both active and passive ftp works from lan pc's to the host ftp.
The lan ftp session can be initiated from the host or any lan pc and
things work because there are no rules on the lan interface except
single
Mike Tancsa wrote:
On 4/11/2012 8:34 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
In the pf log I see the rule number of the rule used to create the log
file entry. pfctl -sr command does not list the rule number of each rule
it lists.
Hi,
Try pfctl -sr -vv
---Mike
Thanks the -vv printed the rule number with
On 4/11/2012 8:34 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
> In the pf log I see the rule number of the rule used to create the log
> file entry. pfctl -sr command does not list the rule number of each rule
> it lists.
Hi,
Try pfctl -sr -vv
---Mike
--
---
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sente
In the pf log I see the rule number of the rule used to create the log
file entry. pfctl -sr command does not list the rule number of each rule
it lists.
So my question is how do I relate the rule number shown in the log
listing back to the text rule file rules?
__
>> Hello,
>> Was running 8.2 and virtualbox 3 - wiped Freebsd 8.2, installed 9.0,
>> installed latest virtualbox port 4.0.14 and the networking broke in my
>> vms.
>>
>> Setup I had:
>>
>> {vm1,vm2,etc}---> vbox internal network -> em2[fi
> Hello,
> Was running 8.2 and virtualbox 3 - wiped Freebsd 8.2, installed 9.0,
> installed latest virtualbox port 4.0.14 and the networking broke in my
> vms.
>
> Setup I had:
>
> {vm1,vm2,etc}---> vbox internal network -> em2[firewall VM]em1 -->
> re0[phy
Hello,
Was running 8.2 and virtualbox 3 - wiped Freebsd 8.2, installed 9.0,
installed latest virtualbox port 4.0.14 and the networking broke in my
vms.
Setup I had:
{vm1,vm2,etc}---> vbox internal network -> em2[firewall VM]em1 -->
re0[physical box]-->ISP
the firewall
Back Story:
Old Server (X32 system, probably FreeBSD 4.3-ish)
New Server (Dual core, X64 with plenty of RAM) running 8.1-RELEASE
New Server was put in production last night as a core router, with
the same rc.conf, firewall rule set and config from the old router
that has been working for
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Antonio Olivares
wrote:
>> A> Is there an easy firewall setup available somewhere (like the one
>> A> referenced below but for FreeBSD)?
>>
>> Here's a script you can use to generate a rules file for IPF.
>>
>>
> A> Is there an easy firewall setup available somewhere (like the one
> A> referenced below but for FreeBSD)?
>
> Here's a script you can use to generate a rules file for IPF.
>
> --
Karl,
I have used your script and it generated me a nice ipf.rules f
OK - I'm confused. Could be all the top posting. ;-)
testbed# man ipfw
Formatting page, please wait...Done.
IPFW(8) FreeBSD System Manager's Manual
IPFW(8)
NAME
ipfw -- User interface for firewall, traffic shaper, packet scheduler,
in-
p]
>>>
>>> NATD and IPFW work together. It's a little hard to explain in this format
>>> so as Dan suggests, you should read the manpage on each. Also, do some
>>> google searches and you will find many helpful articles. But take my word
>>> for t
s format
>> so as Dan suggests, you should read the manpage on each. Also, do some
>> google searches and you will find many helpful articles. But take my word
>> for this, you can do exactly what you want with IPFW+NATD. There are
>> those who will probably promote PF as the
aining.
- M
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Bill Tillman wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Michael Sierchio
> To: Dan Nelson
> Cc: Bill Tillman ; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Sent: Tue, July 12, 2011 6:35:19 PM
> Subject: Re: IPF
From: Michael Sierchio
To: Dan Nelson
Cc: Bill Tillman ; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tue, July 12, 2011 6:35:19 PM
Subject: Re: IPFW Firewall NAT inbound port-redirect
We're not talking about natd. The question was about the use of ipfirewal
In the last episode (Jul 12), Michael Sierchio said:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Dan Nelson wrote:
> > In the last episode (Jul 12), Michael Sierchio said:
> >> Is there a way of specifying a particular public address if there is
> >> more than one bound to the external interface? A la
> >
We're not talking about natd. The question was about the use of ipfirewall nat.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Jul 12), Michael Sierchio said:
>> Is there a way of specifying a particular public address if there is
>> more than one bound to the external
In the last episode (Jul 12), Michael Sierchio said:
> Is there a way of specifying a particular public address if there is
> more than one bound to the external interface? A la
>
> nat 123 config if re0.2 log same_ports redirect_port tcp 10.0.0.3:22
> 102.10.22.1:
Yes; the redirect_port sy
:
>
>
>
> From: Dan Nelson
> To: Michael Sierchio
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Sent: Mon, July 11, 2011 1:07:31 PM
> Subject: Re: IPFW Firewall NAT inbound port-redirect
>
> In the last episode (Jul 11), Michael Sierchio said:
>> Sorry for the naive q
From: Dan Nelson
To: Michael Sierchio
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Mon, July 11, 2011 1:07:31 PM
Subject: Re: IPFW Firewall NAT inbound port-redirect
In the last episode (Jul 11), Michael Sierchio said:
> Sorry for the naive question, but most
In the last episode (Jul 11), Michael Sierchio said:
> Sorry for the naive question, but most of my old rulesets still use
> natd, and I've only used built-in nat for outbound traffic. I'd like
> to redirect certain ports on certain addresses to the same ports on
> internal (RFC1918) addresses. T
Sorry for the naive question, but most of my old rulesets still use
natd, and I've only used built-in nat for outbound traffic. I'd like
to redirect certain ports on certain addresses to the same ports on
internal (RFC1918) addresses. The examples in the man page aren't
helpful, and the handbook
On Fri, 6 May 2011 04:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Bill Tillman articulated:
> Please excuse me. I typed my reply below all the existing text but
> somehow it ended up being formatted into the middle of this one. Can
> someone give me the tip for insuring I don't top post and that my
> reply ends up at the
From: Leonardo M. Ramé
To: questi...@freebsd.org
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 3:44:36 PM
Subject: Home firewall with DLink router & FreeBSD
The short answer is a definite yes, but you will need two NIC's in the FreeBSD
server. I have a FreeBSD server w
Bill Tillman
To: Leonardo M. Ramé ; questi...@freebsd.org
Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 6:53:56 AM
Subject: Re: Home firewall with DLink router & FreeBSD
From: Leonardo M. Ramé
To: questi...@freebsd.org
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 3:44:36 PM
Subject: Home firewall w
--- On Thu, 5/5/11, Jon Radel wrote:
> From: Jon Radel
> Subject: Re: Home firewall with DLink router and FreeBSD
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Date: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 9:50 PM
>
> On 5/5/11 8:37 PM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> >
> > Hi, at home I
/database server.
I must add, the server only have one network card.
I would like to know if its possible to use the FreeBSD server as a
Firewall for the whole network, securing LAN and WiFi connections. If
this can be done, then how? could you point me to some howto?.
--As for the rest, it is mine
server only have one network card.
It becomes difficult to use a server as a firewall unless you have an
"inside" and an "outside" network. Easiest is to simply add another
network card, should that be possible on your server. Another
possibility is to use VLAN taggging and c
know if its possible to use the FreeBSD server as a Firewall
for the whole network, securing LAN and WiFi connections. If this can be done,
then how? could you point me to some howto?.
P.S.: this is the 2nd time I send this email, the first time it got caught by
SpamAssassin. Maybe because a
know if its possible to use the FreeBSD server as a Firewall
for the whole network, securing LAN and WiFi connections. If this can be done,
then how? could you point me to some howto?.
Thanks in advance,
Leonardo M. Ramé
http://leonardorame.blogspot.com
onio
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Karl Vogel wrote:
>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:43:33 -0500,
>>> Antonio Olivares said:
>
> A> Is there an easy firewall setup available somewhere (like the one
> A> referenced below but for FreeBSD)?
>
> Here's a sc
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Polytropon wrote:
You can easily do this with IPFW (from the base system)
Step 1: Create a file /etc/ipfw.conf which will contain
your firewall rules.
/etc/rc.firewall has a bunch of predefined firewall types, usable as-is
or as examples. Instructions are in that file
Antonio Olivares wrote:
Dear kind folks,
Is there an easy firewall setup available somewhere(like the one
referenced below but for FreeBSD)?
i.e, like I saw reading in Distrowatch an easy way(using a page on the
net: http://connie.slackware.com/~alien/efg/)
I have read that there is pf and
On 26 April 2011 08:52, Polytropon wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:34:41 -0500, Antonio Olivares <
> olivares14...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for sharing this. I have a base FreeBSD 8.2 system on one
> > machine and I would like to setup a firewall that allows me to vi
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:34:41 -0500, Antonio Olivares
wrote:
> Thanks for sharing this. I have a base FreeBSD 8.2 system on one
> machine and I would like to setup a firewall that allows me to visit
> websites and not allow incoming traffic. Something easy to set up and
> start
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Daniel Staal wrote:
> --As of April 25, 2011 7:43:33 PM -0500, Antonio Olivares is alleged to have
> said:
>
>> I don't know which one to use, is there a page, howto (build a
>> firewall or convert an existing one) to use here? All I w
--As of April 25, 2011 7:43:33 PM -0500, Antonio Olivares is alleged to
have said:
I don't know which one to use, is there a page, howto (build a
firewall or convert an existing one) to use here? All I want is to be
allowed to visit websites but don't allow anyone out there to come
Dear kind folks,
Is there an easy firewall setup available somewhere(like the one
referenced below but for FreeBSD)?
i.e, like I saw reading in Distrowatch an easy way(using a page on the
net: http://connie.slackware.com/~alien/efg/)
I have read that there is pf and there is an implementation
On 02/01/11 00:40, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 05:58, Da Rock
wrote:
Yes. Me unfortunately, but I did manage to pick it up quite quickly though.
I had a little thief attack one of my ports and attempt login on the
firewall. I had to change it to 'block in $log on $e
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 05:58, Da Rock
wrote:
> Yes. Me unfortunately, but I did manage to pick it up quite quickly though.
> I had a little thief attack one of my ports and attempt login on the
> firewall. I had to change it to 'block in $log on $ext_if all
> block out $log o
my ports and attempt login on
the firewall. I had to change it to 'block in $log on $ext_if all
block out $log on $ext_if all' to actually block the traffic. Bit of a
doozy really, I'm still monitoring the traffic very closely with tcpdump
on the interface and not the log.
Than
Le Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:39:18 +1000,
Da Rock a écrit :
> I spent some time playing with pf and pf.conf, and followed the
> directions in the handbook. It redirected me to the openbsd site for
> pf.conf, and recommended it as the most comprehensive documentation
> for pf.
>
> Firstly, I didn't f
On 01/29/11 23:50, Iñigo Ortiz de Urbina wrote:
I think that kind of user should never be in charge of anything security related
Reading my own post I realise I forgot my question due to kiddie issues
that were occuring in my vicinity. That is, how would one go about this?
As for user suit
I spent some time playing with pf and pf.conf, and followed the
directions in the handbook. It redirected me to the openbsd site for
pf.conf, and recommended it as the most comprehensive documentation for pf.
Firstly, I didn't find that. I had to translate the instructions into
the current ver
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 07:16:01PM +, Arthur Chance wrote:
> On 11/25/10 18:22, Gary Kline wrote:
> [Huge snip]
Super :-)
> > What I don't understand is the CF card and howto install
> > pfSense. I'll re-read wherever I have to but some clues would
> > certainly help. I
On 11/25/10 18:22, Gary Kline wrote:
[Huge snip]
What I don't understand is the CF card and howto install
pfSense. I'll re-read wherever I have to but some clues would
certainly help. I installed pfSense by CDROM initially and
figure this time the install would b
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 12:48:47PM +, Arthur Chance wrote:
> On 11/25/10 03:01, Gary Kline wrote:
> >Folks (mostly Adam),
> >
> >Hang on a sec. I think I misread what my friend said.
> >Following is a snip of what he said was good; that this was among
> >the stuff he installed a few years back
On 11/25/10 03:01, Gary Kline wrote:
Folks (mostly Adam),
Hang on a sec. I think I misread what my friend said.
Following is a snip of what he said was good; that this was among
the stuff he installed a few years back and now was much better::
ALIX.2D13 system board - $115
CompactFlash card
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 09:45:41PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
>
> > Folks (mostly Adam),
> >
> > Hang on a sec. I think I misread what my friend said.
> > Following is a snip of what he said was good; that this was among
> > the stuff he in
Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
_thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
[pfSense], but nada.
Any wizards on this list have a clue?
You'd probably have to build one
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
> Folks (mostly Adam),
>
> Hang on a sec. I think I misread what my friend said.
> Following is a snip of what he said was good; that this was among
> the stuff he installed a few years back and now was much better::
>
>
> > ALIX.2D13 system boa
that sell this.
gary
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:03:56PM +, Arthur Chance wrote:
> On 11/24/10 01:43, Gary Kline wrote:
> >Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
> >typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
> >_thought_ I
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 08:14:01PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
>
> >Anybody?
> >
>
> Gary, in case you didn't catch it the pcengines link already given to you is
> low power setup with comsumption comparable or better than an Atom.
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
>Anybody?
>
Gary, in case you didn't catch it the pcengines link already given to you is
low power setup with comsumption comparable or better than an Atom. It's
also been tested with FreeBSD and pfSense according to the manufacturers
s
ught_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
> >[pfSense], but nada.
> >
> >Any wizards on this list have a clue?
> >
> >--
> > Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service
> >UnixJourney Toward the
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Gary Kline wrote:
> Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
> typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
> _thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
> [pfSense], but nada.
>
&
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:03:56PM +, Arthur Chance wrote:
> On 11/24/10 01:43, Gary Kline wrote:
> >Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
> >typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
> >_thought_ I'd found a comput
On 11/24/10 01:43, Gary Kline wrote:
Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
_thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
[pfSense], but nada.
Any wizards on this list have a clue?
--On November 23, 2010 17:43:12 -0800 Gary Kline wrote:
Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
_thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
[pfSense], but nada.
Any wizards on this
Bruce Cran writes:
> You also get network cards with multiple ports which would work. e.g.
>
> http://reviews.cnet.com/adapters-nics/d-link-dfe-570tx/1707-3380_7-785663.html
The machine I'm typing on has a two port Intel Pro/1000-GT; I
cannot recommend it highly enough.
One ca
On 24.11.2010 02:43, Gary Kline wrote:
> Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
> typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
> _thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
> [pfSense], but nada.
>
> Any wiza
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:26:53 -0800
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Dunno about having them on-board, but anything with a Poulsbo SCH
> should have two PCIe channels, each of which could be used for a
> NIC.
You also get network cards with multiple ports which would work. e.g.
http://reviews.cnet.c
Gary Kline wrote:
> I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs.
Dunno about having them on-board, but anything with a Poulsbo SCH
should have two PCIe channels, each of which could be used for a
NIC.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Maybe someone on-list can help me; after 5+ hours of clicking and
typing, I can't find an atom cpu computer with dual NICs. I
_thought_ I'd found a computer to replace to Kayak firewall
[pfSense], but nada.
Any wizards on this list have a clue?
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought
Folks,
The weakest (and probably most costly power-wise) link among my
three computers is my '98 Kayak that runs pfSense. I just found a
computer that runs ATOM and has two NICS ... i need two because of
the way things were configured. My Dell server and my AMD
"homebrew" that was build out of
Le Fri, 01 Oct 2010 08:24:30 -0400,
Kevin Kobb a écrit :
> Both would probably be fine. However, I would recommend taking a look
> at pfsense if I were you. It is made to do what you want without as
> much of the overhead as a full blown *BSD install.
>
> It is easier to configure, update, the d
On 1 October 2010 15:34, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
> On 1 October 2010 10:16, Daniel Bye
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 09:40:56AM -0400, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
>
> >> Krad, I was under the impression that 'audit' from TrustedBSD is built
> >> into FreeBSD. Is there a facility in OpenBSD that is
On 1 October 2010 10:16, Daniel Bye
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 09:40:56AM -0400, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
>> Krad, I was under the impression that 'audit' from TrustedBSD is built
>> into FreeBSD. Is there a facility in OpenBSD that is "better" or is
>> there something in 'audit' that is lackin
On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 09:40:56AM -0400, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
> On 1 October 2010 05:29, krad wrote:
>
> > In my experiance freebsd should work fine. However I would say openbsd is
> > probably better suited to your needs, due to its tighter security model
> > (auditing)
>
> Krad, I was under th
1 - 100 of 1164 matches
Mail list logo
