On 8/13/07, Adam Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > jamona perez wrote: > > Thanks for the tip, I'm not too sure about this stp stuff, because I > > always think twice before doing that kind of stuff, I've had my share > > of network loops not being always well-handled by switch hardware. On > > the other hand I've read from m0n0wall's forum that it is feasible. > > so if it's the way to go, I'll go. > > Last, (I don't wan't to start flame war, please), as all I want to do > > is transparent FW, maybe I should go for m0n0wall instead of pfsense. > > The drawback of monowall being that it won't support smp, thus making > > me stick to a single celeron 3.33 Ghz, and running freebsd 4.2 (will > > the double-port intel pcie card be supported ?). > > > The Intel nic should be easily supported, though others may know id > there have been lockups or other nasties with the old freebsd version. > > There is a benefit with monowall, in that it's quite a bit faster.
On 4.X based versions, yes. We are faster than 6.X versions of m0n0wall. Keep in mind, 4.X is discontinued. Anyone running a version of m0n0wall that is based on 4.X needs to keep this in mind. In addition m0n0wall will be switching away from 4.X to 6.X in the near future. Scott --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
