On 28 May 2010 07:38, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote:
This is possibly the wrong place to be saying this, but isn't OpenBSD
usually recommended for
routers? I believe the version of pf, for example, is normally kept more
up-to-date than than
in FreeBSD. The major downside I know of is
On 27 May 2010 12:12, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
The hardest job I've had an OpenBSD firewall do is actually as a
mid-level firewall between a DMZ full of web servers and a back-end
database layer. The thing to watch out for is running out of states in
PF. It's
Hi Chuck,
Thanks for the response.
Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the
ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how
much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware?
Something like a 1GHz P3 or equivalent can
On 27.05.2010 17:00, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
Hello everyone.
We're in the very early stages of considering [Free|Open]BSD on
commodity hardware to handle NAT *and* firewall duties for (what I
consider to be) a sizable deployment. Overall bandwidth is low, only a
gigabit connection, but we
On 28/05/2010 12:31, Svein Skogen (Listmail Account) wrote:
On 27.05.2010 17:00, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
Hello everyone.
We're in the very early stages of considering [Free|Open]BSD on
commodity hardware to handle NAT *and* firewall duties for (what I
consider to be) a sizable deployment.
On 28.05.2010 13:38, Bruce Cran wrote:
*snip!*
This is possibly the wrong place to be saying this, but isn't OpenBSD
usually recommended for
routers? I believe the version of pf, for example, is normally kept more
up-to-date than than
in FreeBSD. The major downside I know of is that it's
Svein Skogen (Listmail Account) wrote:
Actually, I'd find an answer from the FreeBSD Networking gurus useful as
well. My trusted Cisco 3640 is getting old (had it's
ten-years-of-service birthday a little while ago), so I guess I must be
prepared to replace it with something new. Preferrably
Hello everyone.
We're in the very early stages of considering [Free|Open]BSD on
commodity hardware to handle NAT *and* firewall duties for (what I
consider to be) a sizable deployment. Overall bandwidth is low, only a
gigabit connection, but we handle approximately fifteen thousand
devices. DHCP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/05/2010 16:00:12, Kevin Wilcox wrote:
Hello everyone.
We're in the very early stages of considering [Free|Open]BSD on
commodity hardware to handle NAT *and* firewall duties for (what I
consider to be) a sizable deployment. Overall
Hi,
NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat.
I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on
modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete?
Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones
guys like soekris
On May 27, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Peter Cornelius wrote:
Hi,
NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat.
I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on
modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete?
It depends upon usage.
Or is it
11 matches
Mail list logo