[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Jesse Guardiani <jesse at wingnet dot net>
 To:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: 1.2b6 lock-ups ....
 Date:  Fri, 04 Mar 2005 03:34:30 -0500
Frederick Page wrote:

> Hallo Christian,
> Christian Rohmann schrieb am 03. March 2005:
>>I just used b6 for about 12 hrs and in between 10 of them m0n0 froze
>>twice. Does any1 here have similar troubles?
> I also had to report several freezes of m0n0 1.2b2 and above. To me
> this seems to be related to traffic (thus indirectly to uptime). My
> network is heavily utilized, have about 400-600 GB/month traffic on
> the WAN interface.
> With 1.2b5 and 1.2b6 (FreeBSD 5.3) it got even worse.
> My hardware is a Soekris net 4801, when I reboot it say every 2 days,
> it runs rock-stable.
> Although I have no way of knowing, I have a gut-feeling that an OS
> like OpenBSD is more suited to a router/security platform. OpenBSD
> also has lesser weight and (IMHO) appears more stable than FreeBSD in
> general. (I evaluated FreeBSD but switched to OpenBSD for my server).
> Although m0n0wall is a great product, I am not convinced that FreeBSD
> is the ideal platform. To me FBSD is going into the same direction
> Linux has already gone. Old unix virtues like stability are sacrificed
> on the altar of new features, new drivers, new hardware. Meaning the
> demands of mass markets are met :-(
> I also bought a WRAP and will test that one too, although I do not
> believe there are hardware problems that will make m0n0 freeze after 7
> to 11 days. That came down to one freeze every 3-4 days since using
> 1.2b5 (now b6).
> Considering things like pf and CARP make me want OpenBSD, my server
> has 170 days uptime by now (and also is heavily utilized) and what
> better OS for a security platform, than the world's safest OS?
> I am currently thinking of setting that up myself (of course without
> the nice web GUI) on the WRAP/Soekris, the constant reboots every 2
> days really are not worthy of a unixoid OS. Even my previous Debian
> router (Kernel 2.4) was much more stable than that. However the 1.1
> was much, much better regarding stability, but that one does not have
> the features of the 1.2 series :-(

I'm also highly interested in reliability, as are, I'm sure, Chris and Manuel.

I don't see 4.x as being the rock of reliability that you make it out to
be, however. I have a 4.x machine that crashes every few months or so
even without high load. I also don't see Linux as unreliable. I have a linux
machine that is just as reliable as my production 4.x machine. The uptimes
are comparable.

I think what you have to realize is the incredible amount of complexity
these OS's deal with, and also the incredible amount of complexity in
hardware. I'm sure you could find configurations and hardware that OpenBSD
crashes on quite frequently.

I don't push a massive amount of traffic across my 4801 (maxed out T1),
but mine is far from unreliable. Have you tried a different 4801?
Production lines are fairly reliable usually, but they do produce bad
batches from time to time.

Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator
WingNET Internet Services,
P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605
423-559-LINK (v)  423-559-5145 (f)