On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Patrick Dohman
wrote:
> Superfluous access to sensor data & watch guard timers etc...
It's pretty useful in high availability enterprise environments. There
is no other good way to collect some of that sensor data.
Brandon Vincent
t;> Grosse
>> Sent: 12 March 2016 13:22
>> To: misc@openbsd.org
>> Subject: Re: Small FW boxes for CORP use (was: T40E APU?)
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:34:16AM +, Kapfhammer, Stefan wrote:
>>> But how would you feed the CAT female jack out of the or
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf Of
Josh
> Grosse
> Sent: 12 March 2016 13:22
> To: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: Small FW boxes for CORP use (was: T40E APU?)
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:34:16AM +
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:34:16AM +, Kapfhammer, Stefan wrote:
> But how would you feed the CAT female jack out of the original
> pcengines enclosure? There are no further mounting holes in it.
I was thinking of the Alix, where enclosures are not included.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 04:42:23PM -0500, Alan McKay wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Josh Grosse wrote:
> > 100Mbit? You could go even smaller, such as the PCEngines Alix
> > platform. They are 32-bit (i386) only, however.
> >
> > Each NIC is able to sustain 70-80 Mbps, in my experienc
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 04:42:23PM -0500, Alan McKay wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Josh Grosse wrote:
> > 100Mbit? You could go even smaller, such as the PCEngines Alix
> > platform. They are 32-bit (i386) only, however.
> >
> > Each NIC is able to sustain 70-80 Mbps, in my experienc
2016-03-11 22:42 GMT+01:00 Alan McKay :
> Ideally I'd like to get a redundant pair of FWs in 1U.
> But I need 4 NICs on each as a bare min.
Lanner FW-7525
Best
Martin
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Josh Grosse wrote:
> 100Mbit? You could go even smaller, such as the PCEngines Alix
> platform. They are 32-bit (i386) only, however.
>
> Each NIC is able to sustain 70-80 Mbps, in my experience.
Do those have 4 NICs?
Ideally I'd like to get a redundant pair of
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 04:18:26PM -0500, Alan McKay wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Brandon Vincent
> wrote:
> > If you have a pair setup for redundancy, it really comes down to the
> > expected network utilization. What sort of network are we talking
> > about?
>
> Well I guess I'd pl
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Brandon Vincent
wrote:
> If you have a pair setup for redundancy, it really comes down to the
> expected network utilization. What sort of network are we talking
> about?
Well I guess I'd place them according to their capability.
Could I put them on a 100Mbit link
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
> Opinions on using either of those as a redundant pair for corporate use?
If you have a pair setup for redundancy, it really comes down to the
expected network utilization. What sort of network are we talking
about?
Brandon Vincent
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
>
> Nope. You might want a Supermicro X11SBA-LN4F or maybe Netgate's
> RCC-VE 2440 if you need 4 ports.
Opinions on using either of those as a redundant pair for corporate use?
--
"You should sit in nature for 20 minutes a day.
Unless you
12 matches
Mail list logo