> Hope you've got a few PCI-X dual-port Intel NICs as well, these can be hard
> to get nowadays, even used.
Up to my ears.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 08:06:46PM +, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
> > Just in case somebody has the same hardware, here's a dmesg dump Notice I
> > had to put
> >
> > # cat /boot/loader.conf
> > legal.intel_wpi.license_ack=1
> > legal.intel_ipw.license_ack=1
> >
> > to get of legal warnings in th
> Just in case somebody has the same hardware, here's a dmesg dump Notice I
> had to put
>
> # cat /boot/loader.conf
> legal.intel_wpi.license_ack=1
> legal.intel_ipw.license_ack=1
>
> to get of legal warnings in the dmesg output.
Thanks - I have about 300 of these sitting in stacks at the momen
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:14:47AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > >
> > > It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
> > > (about Pentium 3 level of performa
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >
> > It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
> > (about Pentium 3 level of performance)
>
> You'd be surprised - a dual core Atom is considerably faster
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >
> > It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
> > (about Pentium 3 level of performance)
>
> You'd be surprised - a dual core Atom is considerably faster
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
> It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
> (about Pentium 3 level of performance)
You'd be surprised - a dual core Atom is considerably faster than a P3
at pushing packets, depending on NICs and the specific board. The
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 06:13:20PM +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:
> Depends on what you mean by Gbit ?
>
> Gigabit @ imix packet distribution ? possibly.
It's a GBit link at a colo, pretty lightly loaded
at the moment.
> Gigabit @ high rate, small packet size, very doubtful.
It would probably
om
> Subject: [pfSense-discussion] Dell PowerEdge 750
>
>
> A working (dead hard drive) Dell PowerEdge 750 (1 GByte RAM,
> can probably double or quadruple that) with two Intel NICs
> onboard (have another dual-port server NIC that fits)
> fell into my hands. CPU is probably
A working (dead hard drive) Dell PowerEdge 750 (1 GByte RAM,
can probably double or quadruple that) with two Intel NICs
onboard (have another dual-port server NIC that fits)
fell into my hands. CPU is probably a 2.6 GHz Pentium 4.
Is this useful material for a pfSense firewall that can handle
~GB
10 matches
Mail list logo
