On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
(about Pentium 3 level of performance)
You'd be surprised - a dual core Atom is considerably
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
(about Pentium 3 level of performance)
You'd be surprised - a dual core Atom is considerably
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:14:47AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:53:19PM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
It would probably still beat my 4x NIC 1.6 GHz dual-core Atoms
(about Pentium 3 level of
Just in case somebody has the same hardware, here's a dmesg dump Notice I
had to put
# cat /boot/loader.conf
legal.intel_wpi.license_ack=1
legal.intel_ipw.license_ack=1
to get of legal warnings in the dmesg output.
Thanks - I have about 300 of these sitting in stacks at the moment, and
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 08:06:46PM +, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
Just in case somebody has the same hardware, here's a dmesg dump Notice I
had to put
# cat /boot/loader.conf
legal.intel_wpi.license_ack=1
legal.intel_ipw.license_ack=1
to get of legal warnings in the dmesg output.
Hope you've got a few PCI-X dual-port Intel NICs as well, these can be hard
to get nowadays, even used.
Up to my ears.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail:
