Re: [pfSense] default gateway over MPLS VPN

point your default gateways to the main internet connection and NOT to the MPLS-Gateways. NAT enabled. But I am doing this already, all branch computers are sent to the internet server in the main office via the router on branch sites to get the Net-to-Net (172.16.11.0/24

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 5/20/2014 4:37 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: > On 5/20/14 11:01 AM, Jim Pingle wrote: >> On 5/20/2014 1:45 PM, Brian Caouette wrote: >>> For the price paid it can't be beat. >> There is more than the sticker price to be considered. >> >> Note that these are just vague numbers that would vary by the sp

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

Many states, but not Minnesota, give you retail rates on putting power back on the grid… in Minnesota we get producer rates (about $.03kwh instead of $.13-16 [seasonally]). On May 20, 2014, at 15:48, Chris Bagnall wrote: > On 20 May 2014, at 21:37, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> Where are you that y

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

As far as architecture is concerned, AMD64 means its written 64-bit processor. Although someone with more knowledge of the inner workings may be able to tell you specific differences, it usually means it was compiled on an AMD processor, but will work on (almost) any 64-bit processor. The thing to

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 20 May 2014, at 21:37, Harlan Stenn wrote: > Where are you that you get electricity for .05/kWh? Here in Oregon we > have pretty great rates, and I think we're paying .10-.12/kWh. I don't know where the OP hails from, but here in the UK (Scotland, specifically, at the moment), it's 0.16 GBP/

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 5/20/14 11:01 AM, Jim Pingle wrote: > On 5/20/2014 1:45 PM, Brian Caouette wrote: >> For the price paid it can't be beat. > > There is more than the sticker price to be considered. > > Note that these are just vague numbers that would vary by the specific > equipment power usage and local powe

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

If you had purchased something more modern, (even an APU, which uses 5-10% of your 2850, and is completely silent) bhyve would be an option. Which is the general direction I'm headed with pfSense for being able to run a media center or NAS on top. Refurb c1100s are < $600 on fleabay with 8 cor

Re: [pfSense] default gateway over MPLS VPN

You asked this already and it has been responded to. Dont double post! 20. mai 2014 17:54 skrev "Michael Schuh" følgende: > 2014-05-20 11:31 GMT+02:00 Faisal Gillani : > >> Hello all >> >> I am using Pfsense with everything, Pfsense based multi homed firewall >> and pfSense based routers >> >> My

Re: [pfSense] default gateway over MPLS VPN

Please don’t double post… :) On May 20, 2014, at 13:10, Espen Johansen wrote: > You asked this already and it has been responded to. > Dont double post! > > 20. mai 2014 17:54 skrev "Michael Schuh" følgende: > 2014-05-20 11:31 GMT+02:00 Faisal Gillani : > Hello all > > I am using Pfsense wit

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 20 May 2014, at 18:45, Brian Caouette wrote: > What software is available to do virtual machines? We use KVM. Kind regards, Chris -- This email is made from 100% recycled electrons ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsens

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

Citrix XenServer is worth a look too. On May 20, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Ryan Coleman wrote: > Same here - 4 servers around the country running it. > > > On May 20, 2014, at 12:57, Doug Lytle wrote: > What software is available to do virtual machines? >> >> I'm currently using ESXi 5.1

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

Same here - 4 servers around the country running it. On May 20, 2014, at 12:57, Doug Lytle wrote: >>> What software is >>> available to do virtual machines? > > I'm currently using ESXi 5.10 Free version. > > Doug > ___ > List mailing list > List@li

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 5/20/2014 1:45 PM, Brian Caouette wrote: > For the price paid it can't be beat. There is more than the sticker price to be considered. Note that these are just vague numbers that would vary by the specific equipment power usage and local power costs. Atom, ~35W, 24h/day @ $0.05/kWh = About $1

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

>> What software is >> available to do virtual machines? I'm currently using ESXi 5.10 Free version. Doug ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

For the price paid it can't be beat. I've seen smaller systems go for much more so figured I had room to grow. At some point I maybe be able to have to virtual machines on this unit and use one for a media center or cloud backup for the home business. Are their packages available for this? I do

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

I concur with Ryan's readings with the 2950s - we use them as KVM host machines in a datacentre environment and they average around 250W under moderate load. That's with 4x SSDs in each. Also worth mentioning that pfSense will barely use a gig of disk space; the 6x 73GB SAS units specced by the

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

Fan noise. While I may not have a 2850, I ran 2x 2950 III's for about 4 years, and the fan noise is LOUD, even AFTER the initial bootup. Initial bootup, those things scream like jet engines on full afterburner. Power consumption, hooked up to my kill-a-watt, idle power is around 220-250W, maxin

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On May 20, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Giles Coochey wrote: > On 20/05/2014 12:28, Ryan Coleman wrote: >> On May 20, 2014, at 1:59, Giles Coochey wrote: >> >>> >>> s >>> Not to mention that if I ran a PE 2850 at home there would probably be >>> complaints about the noise!!! Those things *scream* in th

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

> -Original Message- > From: Brian Caouette > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:00 > > Are we talking fan noise? Hard drive noise? > > Also a comment was made about power. What are we talking? The general comments about how a PE2850 is overkill in the described home environment. > > On 5/

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

Are we talking fan noise? Hard drive noise? Also a comment was made about power. What are we talking? On 5/20/2014 2:59 AM, Giles Coochey wrote: On 20/05/2014 02:12, Chris Bagnall wrote: Forgive me for saying so, but that's a massive overkill for routing a 15Mbps connection. Granted, it'd be e

Re: [pfSense] default gateway over MPLS VPN

2014-05-20 11:31 GMT+02:00 Faisal Gillani : > Hello all > > I am using Pfsense with everything, Pfsense based multi homed firewall and > pfSense based routers > > My Firewall is a has three internet connection which clients see as one > when accessing internet > > My office recently purchased a MP

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 20/05/2014 12:28, Ryan Coleman wrote: On May 20, 2014, at 1:59, Giles Coochey wrote: s Not to mention that if I ran a PE 2850 at home there would probably be complaints about the noise!!! Those things *scream* in the audible sense!!! Typically just on the first boot - mine always stoppe

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On May 20, 2014, at 1:59, Giles Coochey wrote: > On 20/05/2014 02:12, Chris Bagnall wrote: >> Forgive me for saying so, but that's a massive overkill for routing a 15Mbps >> connection. Granted, it'd be entirely appropriate if you were routing >> multiple gig transits in a datacentre environme

[pfSense] default gateway over MPLS VPN

Hello all I am using Pfsense with everything, Pfsense based multi homed firewall and pfSense based routers My Firewall is a has three internet connection which clients see as one when accessing internet My office recently purchased a MPLS VPN solution to connect one of our branch together wit

Re: [pfSense] apu.4c silently dies

On 05/20/2014 07:42 AM, Mathieu Simon (Lists) wrote: > Hi mayak > >> Many roads lead to ... gut says SSD - I'd try running off CD first. > Seems apu1.4c (guess that's what you meant) has a SATA port, now you > only need to get find way for powering a desktop CD/DVD drive (i.e. > spare ATX power sup

Re: [pfSense] Poweredge 2850

On 20/05/2014 02:12, Chris Bagnall wrote: Forgive me for saying so, but that's a massive overkill for routing a 15Mbps connection. Granted, it'd be entirely appropriate if you were routing multiple gig transits in a datacentre environment where the power consumption might be justified, but in a