[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "bhalchandra sawant" <bssawantbs at hotmail dot com>
 To:  radiussupport at lrcommunications dot net, liransgarage at gmail dot com, Jonathan dot DeGraeve at imelda dot be, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch, begood at gmail dot com
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] 50K concurrent users - possible?
 Date:  Tue, 05 Sep 2006 08:29:34 +0530
Hi

Can Censornet take this load.

I found LMS (Lan Management System), but not sure handling this load.

Regards,

-bs sawant


>From: "Alex M" <radiussupport at lrcommunications dot net>
>To: "'liran tal'" <liransgarage at gmail dot com>,"'Jonathan De Graeve'" 
><Jonathan dot DeGraeve at imelda dot be>,<m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>,"'John Gar'" 
><begood at gmail dot com>
>Subject: RE: [m0n0wall] 50K concurrent users - possible?
>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 20:30:06 -0400
>
>I didn't really read full discussion, but I would never put 50k users on 
>one
>box, I would rather do decentralized  sub networks for your location... + I
>highly would doubt that you can have 50k user in one physical location so
>its better in my opinion have multiple network, more reliable and redundant
>in case of failure...  (If I repeated some one, sorry didn't read 
>everything
>:-P
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: liran tal [mailto:liransgarage at gmail dot com]
>Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 4:49 AM
>To: Jonathan De Graeve; m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch; John Gar
>Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] 50K concurrent users - possible?
>
>I'm thinking the pitfalls are probably:
>  * The firewall rules limit that BSD allows (if there is any)
>  * If the httpd would be able to handle the load of requests for
>authentication and such
>  * The through-put of the box. 50k is alot, even if every client is only
>receiving 256kbit/512kbit which is a
>    minimum speed requirement by end-users these days.
>
>Nice thinking about the OO port Jonathan.
>
>On 9/4/06, Jonathan De Graeve <Jonathan dot DeGraeve at imelda dot be> wrote:
> >
> > If somebody does the appropriate funding I will be happy to rewrite
> > everything to an OO infrastructure which will make threading of the
> > captive portal possible. In that case it will certainly be possible to
> > handle 50k users (although it will be without mac locking) and I don't
> > know the maximum ruleset for a BSD based system. But for the moment, not
> > yet... I'm in the way of moving to such an infrastructure.
> >
> > PS even a Cisco doesn't handle this atm. I know only one system that is
> > able of handling 100k users but its not public available yet and it runs
> > on linux. It is from a guy who works at my old university (KULeuven) and
> > consists of at least 2hardware boxes. (router/login-logout frontend
> > server)
> >
> > Can I ask for which situation you need to handle 50k users?
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > J.
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan De Graeve
> > Network/System Engineer
> > Imelda vzw
> > Informatica Dienst
> > +32 15/50.52.98
> > jonathan dot de dot graeve at imelda dot be
> >
> > ---------
> > Always read the manual for the correct way to do things because the
> > number of incorrect ways to do things is almost infinite
> > ---------
> >
> > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > > Van: John Gar [mailto:begood at gmail dot com]
> > > Verzonden: maandag 4 september 2006 8:04
> > > Aan: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> > > Onderwerp: [m0n0wall] 50K concurrent users - possible?
> > >
> > > I need to support session control for 50,000 concurrent users using
> > > MAC RADIUS authentication and up/down bandwidth throttling. For the
> > > task I have no Dual CPU Dual core XEON 3.0GHZ/4MB (4 way).
> > > I don't need any firewall rules, except redirecting users to an
> > > activation portal where they can add their MAC address (no
> > > user/password login is needed).
> > >
> > > Can m0n0wall do the job? I read somewhere it can only use one
> > CPU/Core.
> > >
> > > Also I need to add CARP (but not pfsynch). How difficult is that?
> > > I looked at pfSense too, but the current version will no do MAC auth,
> > > will not process RADIUS bandwidth reply attributes,  and I do need to
> > > shape upload too, which  ALTQ wont.
> > >
> > > /John
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
> >
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>

_________________________________________________________________
The next best thing! Messenger Video Conversation. Click here! 
http://join.msn.com/messenger/overview2000