[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Steve Thomas" <sthomas at consultant dot com>
 To:  "Max Cristin" <max dot cristin at rogers dot com>, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Hardware suggestion
 Date:  Sat, 27 Jan 2007 10:08:14 -0500
The WRAP is faster/cheaper than the Soekris net4801.See the article clip
and link below.

"As you can see, the WRAP is certainly no slouch. What is surprising is
its packet filtering and NAT performance relative to the Soekris net4801,
with which it shares the same processor and Ethernet interfaces. Somehow
the WRAP performs 50% better than the net4801 outbound and 27% inbound.

Manuel Kasper's explanation for this is:

  "....I think I now know why the net4801s forwarding performance was
  inferior to the WRAP: the three NICs share IRQs on the net4801,
  whereas each NIC has its own IRQ on the WRAP. Due to a bug in the
  FreeBSD sis driver, if one NIC is disabled (as was the case with the
  third NIC in my tests), the driver spends lots of time trying to stop
  the already stopped interface during an interrupt. This has been
  fixed in [ed: m0n0wall] 1.1b17 (and the fix is also in 1.1). I'd
  expect performance to be about the same now (I haven't checked
  though)." "


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Max Cristin"
  To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
  Subject: [m0n0wall] Hardware suggestion
  Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:30:39 -0500

  I would like to get some "real world" feedback and suggestions on
  what's the best embedded platform for Monowall. I have been running
  the generico ISO version at home for a while, but soon I will have
  to implement it at work for our servers at the colocation. The main
  thing will be stability and reliability. What's the hardware with
  less problems? I was thinking about the Soekris net4801-60. Is that
  a good choice? Thanks.


  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