On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 01:01:22PM -0500, Nick Lidakis wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 09:34:02AM -0800, AMuse wrote: > > > > Nick: I must be missing something, but why can't you just not use the > > second (or third, or fourth..) interfaces? Is there something special > > about music serving that the other ethernet interfaces would disrupt? > > > > On 1/27/11 8:13 AM, Nick Lidakis wrote: > > > I hope you would also consider a variation of the net6201 with only one > > > ethernet connector. As someone who would like to use these as small > > > music server appliance, having just one ethernet would be ideal. > > This is a music server for audiophiles using high-end 24bit/192Khz USB > digital-to-analog converters. Some are using low noise tube amps and > high efficiency speakers, i.e., greater than 95dB. So, the object here > is to have a minimalist x86 single board computer running Voyage Linux > and Music Player Daemon. Minimalist also means the least amount of EMI/RFI, > power consumption, ability to tun the board via battery, etc. > > I've been using a PC Engines Alix 3d2 for more than a few years in this > capacity, with MPD fetching files via NFS over ethernet. I and others would > like to have an all in one Voyage MPD server that contains an SSD or SATA > disk to store the music files connected directly to the Soekris. > > It makes sense to have a consumer appliance board that is not a > router/firewall come equipped with only one ethernet adapter. Also, correct > me if I'm wrong, but aren't the gigabit adapters much more power hungry than > 10/100 ethernet?
As far as I know, only operation at 1Gbps consumes more power. When operating a 1Gbps port at 100Mbps, the power consumption should be similar. But I might be wrong :) regards, iustin _______________________________________________ Soekris-tech mailing list [email protected] http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
