Re: [pfSense-discussion] optimal way for a colo setup

2009-12-14 Thread Espen Johansen
I guess he means this one: http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/1U/515/SC515-280U.cfm -lsf On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 11:28:46PM +1100, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: What you describe is exactly what we are in the process of

Re: [pfSense-discussion] optimal way for a colo setup

2009-11-10 Thread Chris Buechler
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: generally prefer getting a smaller WAN block and having the larger internal block routed to you, then you can use a combination of NAT So you have a small address space just for the firewalls WANs and other stuff, and get the

[pfSense-discussion] optimal way for a colo setup

2009-11-09 Thread Eugen Leitl
I've built a 1.2.3RC3 box on beforementioned Supermicro dual-core Atom box with an Intel dual-port server NIC and a 2 GByte Transcend DoM (some 200 EUR the Supermicro kit, 35 EUR memory, and 100 EUR the dual-port Intel NIC, the DoM is some 20-30 EUR IIRC). All four NICs (onboard Realteks and

Re: [pfSense-discussion] optimal way for a colo setup

2009-11-09 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 07:54:57AM -0500, Chris Buechler wrote: Lots of options there - they're discussed in depth in the book. I Alas -- Amazon.com estimates delivery for early January 2010. No way to purchase an electronic copy I could get hold of earlier than January? generally prefer

Re: [pfSense-discussion] optimal way for a colo setup

2009-11-09 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 11:28:46PM +1100, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: What you describe is exactly what we are in the process of rolling out, although we are using a different (higher powered) Supermicro server. They make a nice 1RU (half depth) unit with 4 NICs on the front panel.