Use a linux box to run wireshark on instead.
It is cheaper than terminal servers and as a bonuson the same
hardware, processing the same capture files, wireshark will run
several times faster on linux than w2k3
On Sat, Feb 9, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Taco Amory [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
ronnie sahlberg schrieb:
Use a linux box to run wireshark on instead.
It is cheaper than terminal servers and as a bonuson the same
hardware, processing the same capture files, wireshark will run
several times faster on linux than w2k3
Do you have any hard facts, or is this the usual
Hi,
Maybe somebody could help me? In our company we want to sniff on an Ethernet
line to Internet. Currently we have an average throughput of 35 Mbit/s. We have
already placed a line tap inline on the connection towards internet.
The wish is that more then one user can use wireshark
Personal first hand experience.
I have tested this myself on several PCs and compared. The same host,
the same capture file, the same preferences using the same SVN version
of wireshark
it ran 2+ times faster when booting into linux than w2k and w2k3.
Bear in mind, the tests were all for semi
the OSX tests was on similarly specced hardware. I could obviously
not test how OSX Wireshark behaved/performed on the same physical
machine I tested with Windows.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2008 at 11:25 AM, ronnie sahlberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personal first hand experience.
I have tested this
ronnie sahlberg schrieb:
Personal first hand experience.
SCNR to ask your motivations ;-)
I have tested this myself on several PCs and compared. The same host,
the same capture file, the same preferences using the same SVN version
of wireshark
it ran 2+ times faster when booting into
