Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, J.C. Roberts wrote: SNIP > Speaking of day jobs, vendors, vaporware and stuff that goes *REALLY* > fast, have you gotten to play with the 10G myrinet stuff yet? > > I'm still suffering from dehydration due to drooling at the > announcements on their website. > > JCR Not doing anything with Myrinet stuff. I WAS going to have my summer intern add support in OpenBSD for the Intel 10G NIC, but he hasn't finished writing his paper on his first project. diana
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:21:22 -0600 (MDT), Diana Eichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Daniel Polak wrote: >SNIP >> Bill, >> >> As it happens I have been e-mailing with SysKonnect about the SK-9S22 >> and a possible quad port card today! >> They are thinking about a doing a quad port card but need to be sure >> that there is enough interest. >> Anybody interested in a quad port SysKonnect card please e-mail me and I >> will pass on your e-mail address to SysKonnect so they can let you know >> when the quad port card becomes available. > >Don't hold your breath, they've been talking to me for over 2 years about >a particular card and they have yet to produce it and my work day >perspective usually gives me some sway with vendors. > >diana Speaking of day jobs, vendors, vaporware and stuff that goes *REALLY* fast, have you gotten to play with the 10G myrinet stuff yet? I'm still suffering from dehydration due to drooling at the announcements on their website. JCR -- A: Because idiots do not know how to configure their email programs. Q: How does top-posting happen? A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 04:06:33PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > can sombody just GET one and stuff it in a machine? chances are good > supporting them is as easy as adding the IDs to pcidevs. I tried contacting syskonnect about an evaluation unit which they mention on their site but the mail bounced. The US reseller I'm dealing with (incat) has what looks like great prices (SK-9S22 for $144, SK-9E22 for $154), so I'll get one and get the PCI IDs. If the existing sk driver works (*crosses fingers*), I'll order the rest through this same reseller. -jon
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
* Jon Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-22 15:01]: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 03:19:48PM -0400, Brad wrote: > > Note, there are cards that are supported that are not listed in the > > man page. It's hard to have an exact list when there are so many cards > > out there and sometimes even different revisions with the same name > > and different chipsets. The chipset revision is what really > > matters. > > I've been looking at the SK-9S22 and SK-9E22 for a project but will pass > on the 9S22 if its not supported. can sombody just GET one and stuff it in a machine? chances are good supporting them is as easy as adding the IDs to pcidevs. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 03:19:48PM -0400, Brad wrote: > Note, there are cards that are supported that are not listed in the > man page. It's hard to have an exact list when there are so many cards > out there and sometimes even different revisions with the same name > and different chipsets. The chipset revision is what really > matters. I've been looking at the SK-9S22 and SK-9E22 for a project but will pass on the 9S22 if its not supported. I was trying to get prices and found this: http://www.zones.com/cgi-bin/zones/site/product/index.html?id=000194725 Can't find the 9822 on the syskonnect site, but the 98xx series look to have automatic failover in the event of link failure. Anyone used these (in OpenBSD or otherwise) and have news to share? The syskonnect online store seems to be down. Does anyone know of a syskonnect reseller that they've had a good experience with? Thanks, -jon
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:35:27 -0500 Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To be blunt, because when an enterprise just needs pure unfiltered > inter-VLAN routing, Cisco has CEF products which can route between > interfaces at bps and pps rates unapproachable using a general purpose > Unix OS and COTS hardware. You know that CEF is just a poor exscuse for the pathetic performance of the CPU's Cisco put in, right? Dont' drink the Cisco sales rep's Kool-Aid. --- Lars Hansson
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Brad wrote: > > Brad, think you can get them to start producing the 10Gb card I've > > been talking to them for almost 2 years about? > > > > diana > > It would be nice if they even sent us the hardware that was offered via you > quite some time ago nevermind vaporware 10Gb cards. Sorry to hear, they started getting flaky after they were bought out by Marvel. They quit responding to my e-mails in early January, guess they didn't want our business any more. diana
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 05:23:04PM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Brad wrote: > SNIP > > I do not have any SK-based cards using the newer Yukon-2 chips. If someone > > could get me a card or two then it would provide incentive to support the > > cards. SysKonnect stuff is much better than all the other Gig stuff out > > there. > > Brad, hink you can get them to start producing the 10Gb card I've been > talking to them for almost 2 years about? > > diana It would be nice if they even sent us the hardware that was offered via you quite some time ago nevermind vaporware 10Gb cards.
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Daniel Polak wrote: SNIP > Bill, > > As it happens I have been e-mailing with SysKonnect about the SK-9S22 > and a possible quad port card today! > They are thinking about a doing a quad port card but need to be sure > that there is enough interest. > Anybody interested in a quad port SysKonnect card please e-mail me and I > will pass on your e-mail address to SysKonnect so they can let you know > when the quad port card becomes available. Don't hold your breath, they've been talking to me for over 2 years about a particular card and they have yet to produce it and my work day perspective usually gives me some sway with vendors. diana
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Brad wrote: SNIP > I do not have any SK-based cards using the newer Yukon-2 chips. If someone > could get me a card or two then it would provide incentive to support the > cards. SysKonnect stuff is much better than all the other Gig stuff out there. Brad, hink you can get them to start producing the 10Gb card I've been talking to them for almost 2 years about? diana
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:13:48PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 20:06]: > > On 7/21/05, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > * Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 09:21]: > > > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above > > > > 1000Mbps, > > > > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > > > > > why would you want to deal with such crap? geez. > > > > To be blunt, because when an enterprise just needs pure unfiltered > > inter-VLAN routing, Cisco has CEF products which can route between > > interfaces at bps and pps rates unapproachable using a general purpose > > Unix OS and COTS hardware. > > and they are crap. OpenBSD boxes can do far more than you imagine, and > if they can't keep up any more there's still the ability to use more > than one, and even when that doesn't work out any more there is no > reason to use crappy buggy overpriced cisco shit, there's pretty good > gear out there by Extreme Networks and Juniper. CEF was created to workaround the fact that Cisco has pathetically slow CPUs and that's it. Even brand new hardware to this day from Cisco comes with slow CPUs compared to other vendors like Juniper for example. > > > > > I was contemplating a > > > > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). > > > > > I've > > > > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the > > > > > Intel > > > > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > > > > aquire the hardware also. > > > sk(4), way better than em and cheaper too. I dunno wether there are > > > 4ports tho. > > Correct -- SysKonnect does not offer 4 port cards. > > a lot more vendors than just syskonnect have sk card these days, most > marvell based which is syskonnect v1 which is very good. can't really > believe nobody is putting an 21152 or the like and 4 of them on a card. I do not have any SK-based cards using the newer Yukon-2 chips. If someone could get me a card or two then it would provide incentive to support the cards. SysKonnect stuff is much better than all the other Gig stuff out there.
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
* Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 20:06]: > On 7/21/05, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 09:21]: > > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, > > > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > > > why would you want to deal with such crap? geez. > > To be blunt, because when an enterprise just needs pure unfiltered > inter-VLAN routing, Cisco has CEF products which can route between > interfaces at bps and pps rates unapproachable using a general purpose > Unix OS and COTS hardware. and they are crap. OpenBSD boxes can do far more than you imagine, and if they can't keep up any more there's still the ability to use more than one, and even when that doesn't work out any more there is no reason to use crappy buggy overpriced cisco shit, there's pretty good gear out there by Extreme Networks and Juniper. > > > > I was contemplating a > > > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > > > aquire the hardware also. > > sk(4), way better than em and cheaper too. I dunno wether there are > > 4ports tho. > Correct -- SysKonnect does not offer 4 port cards. a lot more vendors than just syskonnect have sk card these days, most marvell based which is syskonnect v1 which is very good. can't really believe nobody is putting an 21152 or the like and 4 of them on a card. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:05:13PM +0200, Daniel Polak wrote: > Original message from Bill Chmura at 21-7-2005 20:02 > > >All of the traffic pretty much will be passing over the router. I see > >the wisdom of what you are saying with redesigning the network and I > >will give it some thought, but the majority of the resources are > >located in one spot. I will mull that over though. As it stands, only > >some students doing filesharing would not pass the router. > > > >I am liking the VLAN concept more and more for the less active > >segments. The whole thing has to fit into the budget. We have a few > >Cisco 3500XL switches that I think support VLAN, so I could task one of > >those to the job probably. > > > >After Henning pointed out to me with the SK cards I don't need to go > >the route of the quad, I am planning on the SK dual port cards. > >http://www.syskonnect.com/products/sk-9s22.htm - but when I searched it > >seems like the .2 revs are becoming hard to find and the .3 is > >unsupported. > > > Bill, > > As it happens I have been e-mailing with SysKonnect about the SK-9S22 > and a possible quad port card today! > They are thinking about a doing a quad port card but need to be sure > that there is enough interest. > Anybody interested in a quad port SysKonnect card please e-mail me and I > will pass on your e-mail address to SysKonnect so they can let you know > when the quad port card becomes available. > > According to the SK man page at > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=sk&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=OpenBSD+Current&arch=i386&format=html > > the SK-9S22 is currently not supported by OpenBSD. > > Daniel Note, there are cards that are supported that are not listed in the man page. It's hard to have an exact list when there are so many cards out there and sometimes even different revisions with the same name and different chipsets. The chipset revision is what really matters.
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
Original message from Bill Chmura at 21-7-2005 20:02 All of the traffic pretty much will be passing over the router. I see the wisdom of what you are saying with redesigning the network and I will give it some thought, but the majority of the resources are located in one spot. I will mull that over though. As it stands, only some students doing filesharing would not pass the router. I am liking the VLAN concept more and more for the less active segments. The whole thing has to fit into the budget. We have a few Cisco 3500XL switches that I think support VLAN, so I could task one of those to the job probably. After Henning pointed out to me with the SK cards I don't need to go the route of the quad, I am planning on the SK dual port cards. http://www.syskonnect.com/products/sk-9s22.htm - but when I searched it seems like the .2 revs are becoming hard to find and the .3 is unsupported. Bill, As it happens I have been e-mailing with SysKonnect about the SK-9S22 and a possible quad port card today! They are thinking about a doing a quad port card but need to be sure that there is enough interest. Anybody interested in a quad port SysKonnect card please e-mail me and I will pass on your e-mail address to SysKonnect so they can let you know when the quad port card becomes available. According to the SK man page at http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=sk&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=OpenBSD+Current&arch=i386&format=html the SK-9S22 is currently not supported by OpenBSD. Daniel
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
All of the traffic pretty much will be passing over the router. I see the wisdom of what you are saying with redesigning the network and I will give it some thought, but the majority of the resources are located in one spot. I will mull that over though. As it stands, only some students doing filesharing would not pass the router. I am liking the VLAN concept more and more for the less active segments. The whole thing has to fit into the budget. We have a few Cisco 3500XL switches that I think support VLAN, so I could task one of those to the job probably. After Henning pointed out to me with the SK cards I don't need to go the route of the quad, I am planning on the SK dual port cards. http://www.syskonnect.com/products/sk-9s22.htm - but when I searched it seems like the .2 revs are becoming hard to find and the .3 is unsupported. Phooey On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:12:29 +0200 Alexander Bochmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > ...on Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 11:50:20AM -0400, Bill Chmura wrote: > > > Ethernet wise, currently the whole mess is at 100MB... It will be that > > way at least for 12 months after this. As far as heavily used, I just > > got on the scene myself and the usage is way down. School, summers > > off. But the end of the year is crazy for them network wise. So in > > the end, all I can say at this point is that its barely running at peak > > usage on 100MB. > > As others suggested, getting a decent switch with VLAN > support and using a single GigE trunk to you router > might be a good start (and even cheaper as a bunch > of 4-port GigE cards). I don't think you will run into > bandwidth problems on the trunk if everything is at > 100mbit now, and you will just have much more flexibility > with the segmentation. You can still push high-volume > VLANs to another trunk port (or dedicated links to the > router) later, if that turns out to be neccessary. > > Also, will all the traffic really pass the router, > or will much of it be local to the respective segments? > Thinking about how to redesign the network to reduce > the load on the router might be a good idea. > > Alex. > -- Bill Chmura Director of Internet Technology Explosivo ITG Wolcott, CT p: 860.621.8693 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w. http://www.explosivo.com
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On 7/21/05, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 09:21]: > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, > > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > why would you want to deal with such crap? geez. To be blunt, because when an enterprise just needs pure unfiltered inter-VLAN routing, Cisco has CEF products which can route between interfaces at bps and pps rates unapproachable using a general purpose Unix OS and COTS hardware. In a later followup Bill Chmura clarified that his network throughput is relatively low, so for him, OpenBSD as the core router is an option. > > > I was contemplating a > > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > > aquire the hardware also. > > sk(4), way better than em and cheaper too. I dunno wether there are > 4ports tho. Correct -- SysKonnect does not offer 4 port cards. I considered SK when I began my deployment, but it was easier to just stick with a company standard (at least I avoided Broadcom 'bge' NICs!) than to justify something unusual to the bean counters. > as somebody else noticed already, using a VLAN-capable switch and > hanging the OpenBSD machine off a tagged port might make sense. Unless I'm not receiving all the posts, that somebody was me. KK
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
Hi, ...on Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 11:50:20AM -0400, Bill Chmura wrote: > Ethernet wise, currently the whole mess is at 100MB... It will be that > way at least for 12 months after this. As far as heavily used, I just > got on the scene myself and the usage is way down. School, summers > off. But the end of the year is crazy for them network wise. So in > the end, all I can say at this point is that its barely running at peak > usage on 100MB. As others suggested, getting a decent switch with VLAN support and using a single GigE trunk to you router might be a good start (and even cheaper as a bunch of 4-port GigE cards). I don't think you will run into bandwidth problems on the trunk if everything is at 100mbit now, and you will just have much more flexibility with the segmentation. You can still push high-volume VLANs to another trunk port (or dedicated links to the router) later, if that turns out to be neccessary. Also, will all the traffic really pass the router, or will much of it be local to the respective segments? Thinking about how to redesign the network to reduce the load on the router might be a good idea. Alex.
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
For the sk(4) cards, if you buy the Linksys ones (only single seaters i believe) you should make sure to get the rev.2 ones, as the rev.3 is realtek based, you can tell on the retail box, it shows the little crab on the chip. Happy hunting - J On 7/21/05, Bill Chmura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > After getting some much needed sleep I realized the key things I left > out of the last post. > > Ethernet wise, currently the whole mess is at 100MB... It will be that > way at least for 12 months after this. As far as heavily used, I just > got on the scene myself and the usage is way down. School, summers > off. But the end of the year is crazy for them network wise. So in > the end, all I can say at this point is that its barely running at peak > usage on 100MB. > > I was thinking Gigabit for the larger buffers they have, and support > future expansion - In a few months, or sooner I want to bring one of > the segments up to GigE from the router out to the switches in that > building. > > Part of the segmentation is to get students and faculity onto different > segments and give me more control at either the inner firewall or the > outer firewall. I can however, as you suggested, aggregate a few into > one subnet. I will look into that today - but the lightly used ones > can be definately be done that way. > > The other reason for segmentation is the incredible sprawl this has... > It stretches from each end of campus to the other. > > Space is not a factor, I can fit a 6U into the rack without much > trouble. > > I too looked for the sk cards, but there is no Quad for them. I was > hoping to reduce interrupts by using Quad cards... If I went with > several sk dual cards, say 3 of them, would my interrupts be killing > me? > > Thanks > > Bill > > > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 02:09:22 -0500 > Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 7/21/05, Bill Chmura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We finally got some money to build a router for the center of a > 200-300 > > > user network. Upon arrival I found it to be one giant segment with old > > > old switches (sort of - not real ones) and terrible sprawl. > > > > > > I need to build a router that will handle 7 segments, 4 of which are > > > very heavily used, 3 of which are pretty light. > > > > Can you define "very heavily used" ? > > > > Have you considered aggregating the lightly-used segments in a slightly > > more modern switch (e.g. a 3524XL), configuring a trunk port from the > > switch to uplink multiple VLANs to a single GigE physical interface on > the > > BSD router? > > > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above > 1000Mbps, > > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > > > Both suggestions are under the assumption that the "router" is not > primarily > > intended as a security separation between subnets. > > > > > > > I was contemplating a > > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > > aquire the hardware also. > > > > We are very happy with the ""Intel PRO/1000MT" quad copper GigE cards, > > but we are not coming close to pushing their limits, I'm still waiting > for OC-3. > > > > > > > Can someone recommend another good obsd friendly good performer / > value > > > for the price Quad Ethernet 1000 card? If I can keep it down, I would > > > use two and not do the 100MB on the slow segments. > > > > > > Also is going PCI-X going to get me much? I was reading some notes in > > > the archives (obsd?) that showed the cards won't need it that much, > and > > > another post saying it was going to be slammed by a Quad card. > > > > If you expect to push hundreds of megabits at peak through the multiport > > card, then PCI-X will buy you some headroom. One caveat, many PCI-X > > motherboards can only run one card at the full 133Mhz speed. > > > > Kevin Kadow
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
* Bill Chmura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 18:12]: > I too looked for the sk cards, but there is no Quad for them. I was > hoping to reduce interrupts by using Quad cards... wrong assumption. quad card does as many ints as 4 one port cards with the same type of chip. > If I went with > several sk dual cards, say 3 of them, would my interrupts be killing > me? bo, because, opposed to the intel shit, sk does proper interrupt mitigation. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
After getting some much needed sleep I realized the key things I left out of the last post. Ethernet wise, currently the whole mess is at 100MB... It will be that way at least for 12 months after this. As far as heavily used, I just got on the scene myself and the usage is way down. School, summers off. But the end of the year is crazy for them network wise. So in the end, all I can say at this point is that its barely running at peak usage on 100MB. I was thinking Gigabit for the larger buffers they have, and support future expansion - In a few months, or sooner I want to bring one of the segments up to GigE from the router out to the switches in that building. Part of the segmentation is to get students and faculity onto different segments and give me more control at either the inner firewall or the outer firewall. I can however, as you suggested, aggregate a few into one subnet. I will look into that today - but the lightly used ones can be definately be done that way. The other reason for segmentation is the incredible sprawl this has... It stretches from each end of campus to the other. Space is not a factor, I can fit a 6U into the rack without much trouble. I too looked for the sk cards, but there is no Quad for them. I was hoping to reduce interrupts by using Quad cards... If I went with several sk dual cards, say 3 of them, would my interrupts be killing me? Thanks Bill On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 02:09:22 -0500 Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/21/05, Bill Chmura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We finally got some money to build a router for the center of a 200-300 > > user network. Upon arrival I found it to be one giant segment with old > > old switches (sort of - not real ones) and terrible sprawl. > > > > I need to build a router that will handle 7 segments, 4 of which are > > very heavily used, 3 of which are pretty light. > > Can you define "very heavily used" ? > > Have you considered aggregating the lightly-used segments in a slightly > more modern switch (e.g. a 3524XL), configuring a trunk port from the > switch to uplink multiple VLANs to a single GigE physical interface on the > BSD router? > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > Both suggestions are under the assumption that the "router" is not primarily > intended as a security separation between subnets. > > > > I was contemplating a > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > aquire the hardware also. > > We are very happy with the ""Intel PRO/1000MT" quad copper GigE cards, > but we are not coming close to pushing their limits, I'm still waiting for > OC-3. > > > > Can someone recommend another good obsd friendly good performer / value > > for the price Quad Ethernet 1000 card? If I can keep it down, I would > > use two and not do the 100MB on the slow segments. > > > > Also is going PCI-X going to get me much? I was reading some notes in > > the archives (obsd?) that showed the cards won't need it that much, and > > another post saying it was going to be slammed by a Quad card. > > If you expect to push hundreds of megabits at peak through the multiport > card, then PCI-X will buy you some headroom. One caveat, many PCI-X > motherboards can only run one card at the full 133Mhz speed. > > Kevin Kadow
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 01:37:52PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 09:21]: > > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, > > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) > > why would you want to deal with such crap? geez. Besides the fact it would EASILY cost way more than his budget allows. > > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > > aquire the hardware also. > > sk(4), way better than em and cheaper too. I dunno wether there are > 4ports tho. I have only seen dual port cards, wish they would make a quad card though. > as somebody else noticed already, using a VLAN-capable switch and > hanging the OpenBSD machine off a tagged port might make sense.
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
* Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-21 09:21]: > Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, > you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) why would you want to deal with such crap? geez. > > I was contemplating a > > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > > aquire the hardware also. sk(4), way better than em and cheaper too. I dunno wether there are 4ports tho. as somebody else noticed already, using a VLAN-capable switch and hanging the OpenBSD machine off a tagged port might make sense. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Need Quad Ethernet for router box
On 7/21/05, Bill Chmura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We finally got some money to build a router for the center of a 200-300 > user network. Upon arrival I found it to be one giant segment with old > old switches (sort of - not real ones) and terrible sprawl. > > I need to build a router that will handle 7 segments, 4 of which are > very heavily used, 3 of which are pretty light. Can you define "very heavily used" ? Have you considered aggregating the lightly-used segments in a slightly more modern switch (e.g. a 3524XL), configuring a trunk port from the switch to uplink multiple VLANs to a single GigE physical interface on the BSD router? Alternately, if you really do need router throughput at or above 1000Mbps, you might want to consider a purpose-built gigabit router from Cisco :) Both suggestions are under the assumption that the "router" is not primarily intended as a security separation between subnets. > I was contemplating a > Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've > got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel > Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to > aquire the hardware also. We are very happy with the ""Intel PRO/1000MT" quad copper GigE cards, but we are not coming close to pushing their limits, I'm still waiting for OC-3. > Can someone recommend another good obsd friendly good performer / value > for the price Quad Ethernet 1000 card? If I can keep it down, I would > use two and not do the 100MB on the slow segments. > > Also is going PCI-X going to get me much? I was reading some notes in > the archives (obsd?) that showed the cards won't need it that much, and > another post saying it was going to be slammed by a Quad card. If you expect to push hundreds of megabits at peak through the multiport card, then PCI-X will buy you some headroom. One caveat, many PCI-X motherboards can only run one card at the full 133Mhz speed. Kevin Kadow
Need Quad Ethernet for router box
We finally got some money to build a router for the center of a 200-300 user network. Upon arrival I found it to be one giant segment with old old switches (sort of - not real ones) and terrible sprawl. I need to build a router that will handle 7 segments, 4 of which are very heavily used, 3 of which are pretty light. I was contemplating a Quad gigabit card and a 100MB Quad card (to keep the price down). I've got a budget of $3000 US to build this thing. I was thinking the Intel Pro 1000 Quad cards, but thats pretty pricy considering I have to aquire the hardware also. Can someone recommend another good obsd friendly good performer / value for the price Quad Ethernet 1000 card? If I can keep it down, I would use two and not do the 100MB on the slow segments. Also is going PCI-X going to get me much? I was reading some notes in the archives (obsd?) that showed the cards won't need it that much, and another post saying it was going to be slammed by a Quad card. Thanks for any advice Bill
