> 5.3 and 5.4 and pfSense are actually slower than m0n0wall and 5.3 by
> about 900 Kbps on a 4501 (11.4 vs. 10.5 Mbps), and similar percentages
> on WRAP and 4801. 5.4 brought no improvement over 5.3. PF does
> handle more sessions a lot better than ipf though, it seems, though
> it's extremely unsteady.
Also, I notice download speed differences between m0n0/pfsense and
pfsense always seems to do better.
For example. Last night I downloaded exact same 30mb file from same
ftp site only within the amount of time it took to reboot my box to
get m0n0 running. Only difference is one is that pfsense is running
from the hard drive while m0n0 is LiveCD.
Pfsense 60.2 = Starts out at humungous 375Kbps and slowly declines to
300Kbps and then stays within 1-2Kbps of that number rest of download.
m0n0 1.2b3 = Starts at 330Kbps and slowly declines to 300Kbps and then
continues past that eventually settling at 280Kbps and randomly
fluctuates upto 284Kbps every so often.
This has been my experience for months now as I went through this same
experiment when 1.2b7 came out. Subsequent tests half hour later
result in very similar numbers.
Just a FYI
Scott mailto:tcslv at cox dot net