Re: [pfSense] looking for perfect pfsense box for home?
Don't know how late I am to the game on this suggestion, but I am quite happy with the Lanner Inc. product I bought. I was able to get them to sell me a single unit, the cost was fine for my needs (at the time an Atom D510). They're rackable, and my FW-7539 has been running non-stop for years. I can't speak for performance as my needs are really simple. http://www.lannerinc.com/products/x86-network-appliances/desktop/ Just make sure to get the components necessary to boot it up (you may need vga adapters, etc.) -peace On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Dave Warren wrote: > On 2016-08-20 04:02, Jim Thompson wrote: > >> On Aug 20, 2016, at 3:10 AM, Dave Warren wrote: >>> >>> On 2016-08-03 08:43, Steve Yates wrote: I'm being serious but what is your rationale for not using pfSense's/NetGate's? https://www.pfsense.org/products/ The "cheap" part (< $299)? We tried a "build our own" approach and it's tough to get a small package. Any old PC will do just fine if one adds an SSD but as someone pointed out that may use far more power in the long run. >>> For me, it's the fact that I want to rackmount my gear, but $1,799.00 is >>> the cheapest option offered on pfSense.org that can rackmount. >>> >> You seem to have added $1000 without justification: >> >> https://store.pfsense.org/SG-4860-1U/ >> > > Perhaps someone should put that on the https://pfsense.org/ website? > > I started at https://pfsense.org/, then clicked on Products, which took > me to https://pfsense.org/products/ which only offers > https://store.pfsense.org/XG-2758/ when I was looking for a new product a > couple weeks ago. It didn't occur to me you would have multiple incomplete > lists of products, so I ordered hardware elsewhere already. Shame, I'd > rather have supported pfSense, but it's too late now. > > -- > Dave Warren > http://www.hireahit.com/ > http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren > > > ___ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] successor to ALIX is here
Might be a little pricey, but I got Lanner to sell me a single unit. With the hard drive mounts, etc., it was about $384 shipped and it's been a champ. I got the 7539 just before they released the 7540. Basically the same unit, but with Ddr3 and a better cpu. http://www.lannerinc.com/products/x86-network-appliances/desktop/fw-7540 Comes with 4 Intel PHY's... I've had mine for over a year I believe... Reach out to them. It isn't like ordering something through Amazon, but it's not impossible. On Apr 3, 2014 9:43 PM, "Nenhum_de_Nos" wrote: > > On Wed, April 2, 2014 11:35, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > > Apu.1c > > > http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Embeddded-Mainboard-mit-x86-CPU-und-Coreboot-2160404.html > > > > http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1c.htm > > > > in stock, EURO 105.13 > > a little off, but are those better as home fileserver then the soekris > 6501 ? > > for some bus links, soekris is really slow on that matter (I have one, > tested more than once :( ) > > looking for small form factor system to house an USB/eSATA HD enclosure. I > talked to pcengines > staff and said there is another on plans, but will take some time. So I > ask :) > > thanks, > > matheus > > -- > We will call you Cygnus, > The God of balance you shall be > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style > ___ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Samba4 package and extend services with pfsense
We are talking about a package, right? Something people can choose to install or... you know... not? I like the idea of being able to turn on windows domain services on my router. For sites with smaller installations, or where "all-in-one" makes more sense than having a VM server, I don't see where this would be a problem, so long as it's optional. This isn't any different from DNS from my perspective. Will it integrate with the pfsense authentication? How about WINS/DNS/DHCP integration? I agree that a full on file server with shares is a bit much, but that should be left up to the end user. -peace On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Diego Barrios wrote: > Sorry but I can`t see any good point for this. > > PFsense is a well known distribution due to the stability of it`s > core-components and as a Firewall/Router appliance, not an "all in one" > distribution. > > There are dozens of linux-based file-server distributions around, even at > a small-office you can have both PFsense and "younameit" sharing the same > physical hardware but on separate VMs. > > My $0.02 > > Seko > > > > > -- > *From: *"Luiz Gustavo Costa" > *To: *list@lists.pfsense.org > *Sent: *Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:49:30 AM > *Subject: *[pfSense] Samba4 package and extend services with pfsense > > Hi guys ! > > > I have worked in the Samba4 package for pfsense, not only act as a > domain member, but also act as a domain controller and i see this as an > opportunity to extend the pfsense to be more than a firewall and act as > a new service on the network in a new installation in another hardware > to act as a domain controller in Active Directory with power tools > native firewall. > > ... > > ___ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
