[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 To:  JP Vossen <jp at jpsdomain dot org>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] SD MythTV, more CPU needed on FW?
 Date:  Fri, 11 Sep 2009 04:17:07 -0400
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:37 AM, JP Vossen <jp at jpsdomain dot org> wrote:
> The number of collisions on the LAN is probably not as interesting as it
> looks, as I have uptime of 42 days and for at least a couple of weeks of
> that the LAN was a *hub* not a switch, and I know I had a high collision
> rate.

It doesn't look all that interesting anyway.  :)  That would explain
how that got there, even if it were on a switch that's such a small
percentage that it won't cause serious performance problems, though I
would have recommended swapping cables and/or switch ports.

> Michel, the purpose of the M0n0wall is to firewall and log wireless. I'd
> rather use the WRT as a wireless point and use the firewall as a firewall.

That's the best approach, and putting it on a separate interface is
the way to go. Bridging or routing shouldn't make any performance

> Separate NICs are an interesting thought. The segments ended up
> on the same NIC mostly by accident, and could be moved.  I'd had some
> half-baked idea that having them on the same card might help, but I hadn't
> been thinking that through.

It still gets processed the same way whether it's on the same card or
a different one.