Eric Collins wrote:
> David Statman wrote:
>>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
>>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,
>>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
> 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
Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator
WingNET Internet Services,
P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605
423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f)