[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Jason Humes <jhumes at acs dot on dot ca>
 To:  'alex wetmore' <alex at phred dot org>, "'m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch'" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] PIX vs m0n0wall testing --Speed test results on De ll!
 Date:  Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:12:03 -0500
Hi
We just have this box as a testing platform...and no, traffic shaping is
turned off, the box is not doing any NAT (advanced nat is turned on to
disable nat), firewall rules are permit any any on wan and lan...any idea
why its soooo slow?  Thanks.

jason

-----Original Message-----
From: alex wetmore [mailto:alex at phred dot org] 
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:07 AM
To: Jason Humes
Cc: 'm0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch'
Subject: RE: [m0n0wall] PIX vs m0n0wall testing --Speed test results on De
ll!


On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Jason Humes wrote:
> I've done some testing of the m0n0wall on a Dell 3.2Ghz with 512MB RAM 
> and here are my results (not too impressive, maybe some memory buffer 
> tuning is in order?)

Wow, that is the most overkill box I've heard of yet for m0n0wall.

> 1518 byte frames - 33Mb/s

That is about 25% slower than my WRAP board.

What ethernet cards are being used?  Do you have traffic shaping turned on 
for these two interfaces?

alex