[pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. James ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:50 AM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. ** ** James Traffic Squeezer is the only thing I have found that looks somewhat developed and open source. (trafficsqueezer.org) I have never tried to use it nor do I know how it could fit into pfsense since it is mainly developed on Fedora from the looks of it. I would love to hear any success stories as well! Andrew ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:50 PM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. There is WANProxy http://wanproxy.org/ but never used it so can't comment on its performance or how well it works. later -- .warren ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
[pfSense] Watchdog timer?
I cannot see any centralized information on setting up a watchdog timer in pfSense 2, I do see some random posts about peoples nics emitting messages about timeouts and some specific motherboards and their capabilities. Other than reading http://koitsu.wordpress.com/2010/07/13/freebsd-and-hardwaresoftware-watchdogs/, where should I go to learn more about setting a watchdog timer up? -Jason -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100- - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
We use traffic squeezer between two end points in our WAN (using UBNT links that natively support about 50mbps) and we are seeing 90mbps or so on average Great tool We use them transparently however on the end points - not really a Wan Optimization - just in between links - but works very very well. On Apr 12, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Andrew Cotter wrote: On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:50 AM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. James Traffic Squeezer is the only thing I have found that looks somewhat developed and open source. (trafficsqueezer.org) I have never tried to use it nor do I know how it could fit into pfsense since it is mainly developed on Fedora from the looks of it. I would love to hear any success stories as well! Andrew ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
On Apr 12, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Warren Baker war...@decoy.co.za wrote: On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:50 PM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. There is WANProxy http://wanproxy.org/ but never used it so can't comment on its performance or how well it works. Chris and I have recently discussed adding WANproxy to the mix. Maybe not as part of pfSense, but certainly in the same mold. Jim ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
Hi Jim, That’s very interesting. If not directly integrated into pfsense how do you envision it might take shape? What do you think of Glenn Kelley’s comment about the very impressive numbers he’s been getting using Traffic Squeezer? James From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Jim Thompson Sent: April-12-13 1:32 PM To: pfSense support and discussion Cc: pfSense support and discussion Subject: Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization On Apr 12, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Warren Baker war...@decoy.co.zamailto:war...@decoy.co.za wrote: On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:50 PM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.commailto:jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. There is WANProxy http://wanproxy.org/ but never used it so can't comment on its performance or how well it works. Chris and I have recently discussed adding WANproxy to the mix. Maybe not as part of pfSense, but certainly in the same mold. Jim ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization
On Apr 12, 2013, at 2:36 PM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Hi Jim, That’s very interesting. If not directly integrated into pfsense how do you envision it might take shape? In general I'm not ready to discuss pfSense futures on list. However, if you think of pfSense as an appliance platform, you will be on the right track. What do you think of Glenn Kelley’s comment about the very impressive numbers he’s been getting using Traffic Squeezer? Impressive, but it's data dependent, of course. Jim James From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Jim Thompson Sent: April-12-13 1:32 PM To: pfSense support and discussion Cc: pfSense support and discussion Subject: Re: [pfSense] Open Source WAN Optimization On Apr 12, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Warren Baker war...@decoy.co.za wrote: On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:50 PM, James Caldwell jamescaldw...@hurricanecs.com wrote: Has anyone had any kind of success running an open source or commercial alternative to riverbed for WAN optimization? It would be great if some of solution like this was available and even better if we could run it inside of pfsense. Cheers. There is WANProxy http://wanproxy.org/ but never used it so can't comment on its performance or how well it works. Chris and I have recently discussed adding WANproxy to the mix. Maybe not as part of pfSense, but certainly in the same mold. Jim ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
[pfSense] Prevailing wisdom on Hyperthreading?
A couple years ago when the topic of CPU hyper threading came up I remember folks being advised to disable it. Is that still the prevailing wisdom and current best practice? Thank you. -Nate ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Prevailing wisdom on Hyperthreading?
On 2013-04-12 13:18, Nathan C. Smith wrote: A couple years ago when the topic of CPU hyper threading came up I remember folks being advised to disable it. Is that still the prevailing wisdom and current best practice? On P4 series CPUs, you should absolutely disable it. On modern CPUs, there are a few types of loads where it might actually help, but generally it seems reasonably harmless, but I haven't seen much indicating it's beneficial to disable it, so I leave it enabled on my servers and workstations. On pfSense, however, I'd almost be inclined to disable it. pfSense is rarely CPU-bound (unless you do a lot of high speed VPN connections or proxying), but pfSense is latency sensitive and Hyperthreading might actually increase latency very slightly. -- Dave Warren http://www.hireahit.com/ http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
