|
||||||||
Eric Collins wrote: > > > David Statman wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>We're looking at using m0n0wall at our company. We currently have around >>50 users internally, although we could end up at 60-70 users by the end of >>the >>year. I'd like to hear from others who use m0n0wall in similarly-sized >>organizations, particularly with respect to whether or not you've >>experienced any performance issues. My boss is a little skittish about >>relying on open source software (however good it may be) for our firewall. >> >>More info...We host a website with ASP pages that query a SQL database. >>So far, the number of simultaneous connections to our website has remained >>under 100. We also have an Exchange server and an FTP server. About 15 >>remote users connect to us via Terminal server. We also have a VPN tunnel >>established with one of our business partners. >> >>Thanks in advance to any who share their experiences, >> >>David Statman >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch >>For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch >> >> >> >> >> > David, > > Currently our company offers high speed internet (5mb per user) to the > building tenants where our datacenter is located, in all we have around > 120 clients using this network which all lies behind a single m0n0wall > system. It never blinks, I have had 1 lockup in the last 3 months which > turned out to be a flakey power supply. The system typically on a busy > day pushes 7-15Mbps without problems. Hardware is a P4 3.2 with 1024mb > ram and Intel Pro NICs. > > We also use it to protect our server farms, some run in DMZ (bridged) > others run in the LAN with port forwards. On our main server rack we > have each server with 2 NICs one NIC is connected to the filtered bridge > DMZ side for public services (web mail dns..etc) the other NIC is > connected to the LAN side where we provide VPN access for our employees > to access and maintain the servers over an encrypted channel. This setup > so far has served us great its been rock solid. Hardware for these > setups is a P4 3.2 with 1024mb ram and Intel Pro NICs. > > As for performance issues, all I can say is use good hardware, it make > one heck of a difference when pushing the Mbps around. I personally > wouldnt use a wrap or soekris board for what we have setup because of > the throughput we need, so we went with high end. I tend to agree with this. I had a Soekris 4801 riding a saturated T1 in bridge mode doing traffic shaping for about a week. The webGUI was painfully slow, but the Soekris seemed to handle the traffic quite well. I wouldn't place a Soekris 4801 on anything larger than a saturated T1 though. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net |