Re: from very early this morning...
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 01:47:11AM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote: > > >(But if a dual or a quad sucks up too > >many watts, that blows much of the original purpose of cutting my > >footprint. > > > Newer cpu's(multicore vs single) are pretty efficient, here's an article > so you don't have to take my word for it. > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-cpu-power-consumption,1750-11.html > > also in general if you want lower power consumption look for cpu's w/ > smaller fab eg in term of power consumption and size 90 > 65 > 45 OUTSTANDING. thanks very much... i have been wondering whether it was worth upgrading my very old hardware (until there are really new low-power cpu's) -- or Not. :-) > >gary > > > > > > > > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: from very early this morning...
(But if a dual or a quad sucks up too many watts, that blows much of the original purpose of cutting my footprint. Newer cpu's(multicore vs single) are pretty efficient, here's an article so you don't have to take my word for it. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-cpu-power-consumption,1750-11.html also in general if you want lower power consumption look for cpu's w/ smaller fab eg in term of power consumption and size 90 > 65 > 45 gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: from very early this morning...
On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 22:10 -0400, Carl Chave wrote: > Hi Gary, > Just a couple of thoughts, as your setup sounds similar to mine (and a > lot of others' I'm sure) - I too recently decided to make a concerted > effort to reduce power consumption. I just re-did my file server with > FreeNAS and even though I've got tons of hardware laying around I > decided to buy the Intel 945GCLF mini-itx board based on the Atom > processor, like you find in most netbooks. I put a gigabit NIC in it > though as the onboard is 10/100 (but I knew that and already had the > NIC). It's running great so far. > > I'd like to replace my pfSense router/firewall, which is currently > powered by an AMD Duron with another mini-itx board that I've had > forever, it's one of the Via C3 500 Mhz based boards. It's only got > one PCI slot though, which gets me back to the topic at hand. > > I just changed my network topology when I stood up the new file > server. It's now: > > |--> Wired LAN > ADSL Modem <--> pfSense > | |--> WAP --> WLAN > | > |--> DMZ (web server) > Forgive my artwork. > > I have my ADSL modem set to bridged ethernet mode which disables all > the router/firewall/dhcp features of the modem and just turns it into > a media/protocol converter between the phone line and the ethernet > cable going to the pfSense box. I use the onboard 10/100 NIC for that > PPPoE connection. > > I've got three more NICs installed to make up the remaining > connections. The wired LAN and the WLAN interfaces are bridged. I > initially had these as separate networks but most of my media players > are wireless and the file server is on the wired side so bridging it > was the easiest way (for me!) to get the broadcasts through. > > The web server is connected directly to the third NIC at the moment > and is it's own network. It's still behind the firewall but I can > open ports now to it while still protecting the rest of the LAN from > the web server if it get's compromised. At least, that's the theory. > > So that's my setup, don't know if that's the kind of feedback you're > looking for but I'd like to hear comments and see what others have > going. As far as I know, my 1.5 M/768K feed is "DSL" not "ADSL"; I don't think it makes that much difference. Anyway, it sounds like I'd like to do something like you have. Troubles are that my physical disability prevents me from doing much beyond the keyboard. Then there is the question of which make of Intel I want for my new FBSD or Ubuntu. I'm thinking of something that willl last several years--possibly a quad with lots of disk and memory. (But if a dual or a quad sucks up too many watts, that blows much of the original purpose of cutting my footprint. gary > > Carl > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote: > > > > Gary Kline wrote: > > > > [...big snip...] > > > > > if i've made any sense so far, great! if not,i'm open for > > > questions. i'm also open for suggestions on how to alter this > > > network configuration. > > > > > > thanks for reading this far. > > > > > > gary > > > > > > > > > It might be simplest to replace my firewall and my server with > > > low-energy-usage i386 computers; is there a better way? > > > > What are your requirements for your network ie. are you requiring any > > fancy trickery, or is this simply trying to NAT a couple of machines > > behind an ADSL connection? > > > > Steve > > ___ > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: from very early this morning...
On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 19:23 -0400, Steve Bertrand wrote: > Gary Kline wrote: > > [...big snip...] > > > if i've made any sense so far, great! if not,i'm open for > > questions. i'm also open for suggestions on how to alter this > > network configuration. > > > > thanks for reading this far. > > > > gary > > > > > > It might be simplest to replace my firewall and my server with > > low-energy-usage i386 computers; is there a better way? > > What are your requirements for your network ie. are you requiring any > fancy trickery, or is this simply trying to NAT a couple of machines > behind an ADSL connection? No trickery; just trying to run a few desktops and a firewall plus my server. Of course, at the lowest power use, meaning that I'm trying to combine servers, and so on. > Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: from very early this morning...
Hi Gary, Just a couple of thoughts, as your setup sounds similar to mine (and a lot of others' I'm sure) - I too recently decided to make a concerted effort to reduce power consumption. I just re-did my file server with FreeNAS and even though I've got tons of hardware laying around I decided to buy the Intel 945GCLF mini-itx board based on the Atom processor, like you find in most netbooks. I put a gigabit NIC in it though as the onboard is 10/100 (but I knew that and already had the NIC). It's running great so far. I'd like to replace my pfSense router/firewall, which is currently powered by an AMD Duron with another mini-itx board that I've had forever, it's one of the Via C3 500 Mhz based boards. It's only got one PCI slot though, which gets me back to the topic at hand. I just changed my network topology when I stood up the new file server. It's now: |--> Wired LAN ADSL Modem <--> pfSense | |--> WAP --> WLAN | |--> DMZ (web server) Forgive my artwork. I have my ADSL modem set to bridged ethernet mode which disables all the router/firewall/dhcp features of the modem and just turns it into a media/protocol converter between the phone line and the ethernet cable going to the pfSense box. I use the onboard 10/100 NIC for that PPPoE connection. I've got three more NICs installed to make up the remaining connections. The wired LAN and the WLAN interfaces are bridged. I initially had these as separate networks but most of my media players are wireless and the file server is on the wired side so bridging it was the easiest way (for me!) to get the broadcasts through. The web server is connected directly to the third NIC at the moment and is it's own network. It's still behind the firewall but I can open ports now to it while still protecting the rest of the LAN from the web server if it get's compromised. At least, that's the theory. So that's my setup, don't know if that's the kind of feedback you're looking for but I'd like to hear comments and see what others have going. Carl On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote: > > Gary Kline wrote: > > [...big snip...] > > > if i've made any sense so far, great! if not,i'm open for > > questions. i'm also open for suggestions on how to alter this > > network configuration. > > > > thanks for reading this far. > > > > gary > > > > > > It might be simplest to replace my firewall and my server with > > low-energy-usage i386 computers; is there a better way? > > What are your requirements for your network ie. are you requiring any > fancy trickery, or is this simply trying to NAT a couple of machines > behind an ADSL connection? > > Steve > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: from very early this morning...
Gary Kline wrote: [...big snip...] > if i've made any sense so far, great! if not,i'm open for > questions. i'm also open for suggestions on how to alter this > network configuration. > > thanks for reading this far. > > gary > > > It might be simplest to replace my firewall and my server with > low-energy-usage i386 computers; is there a better way? What are your requirements for your network ie. are you requiring any fancy trickery, or is this simply trying to NAT a couple of machines behind an ADSL connection? Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
from very early this morning...
I'm enclosing most of what I wrote late last night; essentially a request
for how to restrucure my network so that it is easily to maintain and
uses much less energy. --I sent a few emails from a different platform
where I have mutt. Don't know why this did not get out; it was in my
~/Maildir/DOT/[directories on my mailserver. [?]
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:56:46 -0700
From: Gary Kline
To: Polytropon
Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List
Subject: Re: mayday, mayday
X-Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986.
X-Of_Interest: With 22 years of service to the Unix community.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)
Status: RO
{edited for [hopeful] clarity}
it was my pfsense firewall. it took more than 8 hours, an M.E.
buddy retired from Boeing coming over, three fruitless phone
calls, then my just-pondering a good 20 minutes. finally, i
power-cycled the firewall, and on reboot, fsck cleared
out a bunch of mismatches and other disc garbage. upon full reboot,
i was back in contact with the rest of the world.
the firewall still isn't working completely, but i doubt it is
very serious. no worms ... [?] i just can't ping my local IP's.
both my main server and firewall are running on extremely old
hardware. hp kayaks that i was given years ago and upgraded.
disks, memory, probably one-new-fan. still, they are fast
approaching their end/live. this brings up some questions that
i have been meaning to ask this list for several weeks.
until my wife interrupted my dreams with: "you've got to get up
and fix your system; i can't get on my laptop.", i was going to do
the usual and postpone this for another few days [/weeks/months].
anyway, i was ++stumped. i rebooted everything, Et Cetera.
nutshell, around 16.40 i collapsed on sofa, then decided that
this has to be D-day; i.e.:: decision-day. or maybe Q-Day,
time to ask the list for advice.
I have four (4) tower cases here, and between 3 "laptop"
computers, not all in continuous use.in short,
it is time, or Past-Time, to cut my energy use here.
First: i will always stick with FreeBSD as my primary server.
no matter what i wind up using as toys, {music, videos, [...]}
i'll pony up for at least two new computers. one to do my
DNS,mail, and web [and firewall??], and
Second, one to replace this desktop, which has hosted FBSD since
version 2.0.5. I know where stuff lives ... and so on.
Do i really need something as beefy as a pfsense standalone?
is there a way i can run it in a jail? before my dec., '06
network meltdown i was using ifp quite well on ns1.thought.org.
After a few weeks of help from jon horne, i had a new/used Dell
plus the firewall. My former server was stripped down a
bit.
i got highspeed DSL from Qwest, our telco, a year ago. jon
talked the installed thru how things fit. i had no clue then,
nor now. the firewall has two NIC's; the Qwest router is part
of my network. from the firewall, the cable goes into my
16-port switch. the server also plugs into the switch. that
is about the limit of my understanding right now.
if i've made any sense so far, great! if not,i'm open for
questions. i'm also open for suggestions on how to alter this
network configuration.
thanks for reading this far.
gary
It might be simplest to replace my firewall and my server with
low-energy-usage i386 computers; is there a better way?
>
> --
> Polytropon
> From Magdeburg, Germany
> Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
> Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org www.thought.org Public Service Unix
http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
