On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 20:10:14 -0800 jungle Boogie <jungleboog...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Brad, > On 27 November 2014 at 19:51, Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com> wrote: > > On 11/27/14 22:35, jungle Boogie wrote: > >> Anyone have any objections? I know the NICs are not intel so that will > >> probably get a strike against it, but I like the low power. > > > > > > Unless you guys give some sort of hints as to what these routers and / > > or firewalls are going to be used for just asking for hardware > > recommendations without such details is useless. What sort of throughput > > / packets per second do you forsee on the inside network? What is your > > target or expectation? If there is a WAN connection how fast is it? Are > > you lucky enough to have Gbit or is it only say a 50Mbps connection? > > Those types of details matter. > > > > > > I think the WAN on my home connection is 100Mbit. I'd essentially like > it to replace the cable company netgear router. > > Regarding PPS, I have no idea how I'd measure that. It would be > serving a home network with moderate network usage. I'd like basically > have a router that I can experiment with pf and openbsd without the > worry that the hardware is no good. > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > jb > > -- > ------- > inum: 883510009027723 > sip: jungleboo...@sip2sip.info > xmpp: jungle-boo...@jit.si >
you can just use old hardware for these purposes. from the man who literally wrote the book on pf (from pf tutorial via http://home.nuug.no/~peter/pf/en/long-firewall.html): I have not seen comparable tests performed recently [3.1 era], but in my own experience and that of others, the PF filtering overhead is pretty much negligible. As one data point, the machine which gateways between one of the networks where I've done a bit of work and the world is a Pentium III 450MHz with 384MB of RAM. When I've remembered to check, I've never seen the machine at less than 96 percent 'idle' according to top.
