Scott Ullrich wrote:

>On 2/19/06, Alex WC Lee <alexeen at noservice dot net> wrote:
>  
>
>>Well, for m0n0wall, I can put it on a Soekris NET4801 with a 266MHz
>>processor and the processor usually idles at 0-3% and response from the
>>web administration is quite fast. Though, with pfsense, the CPU is
>>constantly at 100%, and web response is much slower, so I assume one
>>would need a more powerful processor for pfsense. For me, m0n0wall +
>>edward's hack for transparent proxying did the trick and I gave up on
>>pfsense. So it really depends if you need those extra features provided
>>by pfsense (ie. SSH, plugins, etc...).
>>    
>>
I run pfSense on a 266MHz WRAP (quite similar to the Soekris 48xx series).

It actually forwards 802.11 frames (using real 802.1d bridging) *faster*
than m0n0wall.

Jim