[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Hilton Travis <Hilton at QuarkAV dot com>
 To:  "m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] m0n0wall compatible Gigabit hardware?
 Date:  Sat, 06 Mar 2004 09:34:49 +1000
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 02:20, Adam Nellemann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for all the info HiltonT!
> 
> > The only issue would be the type of switch in use.
> 
> I guess I should make sure to get a 10/100/1000 (or at least a 
> 100/1000) switch then. Hope this doesn't make them much more expensive!

A 10/100/1000 would always be better for adding other devices, than a
pure 1000 switch - such as additional PCs that are being used on a
temporary basis, routers, etc.

> > Gigabit anywhere near current wireless kit is complete and utter
> > overkill.  The fastest commonly available WiFi protocol is 54Mbps,
> > achieving a shared bandwidth of about 30Mbps if you have a homogenous
> > 802.11g network.  This drops significantly if you have a heterogenous
> > 802.11b/802.11g network.  The new "Super G" standard of 108Mbps works
> > ONLY in a homogenous environment, delivering about 55-60Mbps of shared
> > actual throughput.
> 
> The idea was to use Gigabit to my workstation (I'll then have to learn 
> to live with the cable of course), but preserve the wireless for my 
> other, less speed craving, machines.

Don't you also have a video and power cable to your workstation?  What
difference will the addition of a network cable make?

> Regarding the wireless AP: The reason I asked about this was that I'm 
> not completely satisfied with my current setup, with a wireless card 
> on OPT1. As far as I can see, this only gives me about 2Mbps per host! 
> I assume a dedicated AccessPoint will perform better than that (also 
> it would give me an excuse for upgrading to G, possibly even Super G, 
> if I can find the gear!)

Don't forget that WiFi is a shared bandwidth solution - like the old
network hubs were.  This is the reason for the pathetic performance per
PC.  Remember, this is why we've all moved to switches - way faster
throughput.

Also, MAKE SURE that all machines on the WiFi network are running the
same protocol - all 802.11b or 802.11g, but not a mixture of both.  If
you have a mixture, use one 802.11b AP and another 802.11g AP as this
will increase net throughput.

> I guess there would be some advantage in placing the AP on OPT1 
> through a 100Mbps NIC, instead of going through the Gigabit switch.

Definitely.  You can then assign a different network to the WiFi PCs and
filter the traffic through the m0n0wall.  Also, make sure that you
implement WPA security - WEP is a joke, MAC filtering isn't much better,
and SSID hiding is not even worth the waste of time to set it up.

> > As for Gigabit cards that are supported in m0n0wall, that WOULD be
> > interesting as I'm sure many people would be looking this way in the
> > foreseeable future for their LAN/DMZ interface, not necessarily for
> > their WAN interface (and if anyone DOES have a Gigabit connection to the
> > Internet, PLEASE let me know!!!)
> 
> Well, I don't know if they use Gigabit NICs, but I think my brother 
> has around 4.5Gbps on the job (and thats not even their full 
> bandwidth, if I remember correctly!)

I've seen reports that Intel Gigabit Copper NICs work fine.  I'd also have 
expected this as they have a single driver that supports almost all of their 
NICs.

-- 

Regards,

Hilton Travis                   Phone: +61-(0)7-3343-3889
Manager, Quark AudioVisual      Phone: +61-(0)419-792-394
         Quark Computers         http://www.QuarkAV.com/
(Brisbane, Australia)            http://www.QuarkAV.net/

Open Source Projects:		http://www.ares-desktop.org/
				http://www.mamboband.org/

Non Linear Video Editing Solutions & Digital Audio Workstations
 Network Administration, SmoothWall Firewalls, NOD32 AntiVirus
  Conference and Seminar AudioVisual Production and Recording

War doesn't determine who is right. War determines who is left.