Chris Buechler wrote:
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 9:06 PM, Ugo Bellavance wrote:
Chris Buechler wrote:
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
This is the exact issue I had with the PRO100's. I never tried
disabling TSO or applying the patch.
http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/F
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 9:06 PM, Ugo Bellavance wrote:
> Chris Buechler wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
>>>
>>> This is the exact issue I had with the PRO100's. I never tried
>>> disabling TSO or applying the patch.
>>>
>>> http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/F
Chris Buechler wrote:
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
This is the exact issue I had with the PRO100's. I never tried
disabling TSO or applying the patch.
http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-EN-09:03.fxp.asc
That was a regression in 7.2. It's not applicable to
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
> This is the exact issue I had with the PRO100's. I never tried
> disabling TSO or applying the patch.
>
> http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-EN-09:03.fxp.asc
>
That was a regression in 7.2. It's not applicable to 1.2.2-release
(wh
This is the exact issue I had with the PRO100's. I never tried
disabling TSO or applying the patch.
http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-EN-09:03.fxp.asc
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Chris Buechler wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
>> PRO 100's have s
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Tim Dressel wrote:
> PRO 100's have serious problems in BSD7.
>
That's not true. I know there are issues in combination with some
Adaptec RAID cards but other than that they work fine.
> Is the Pro/1000 better than the Pro/100? Is the em driver better than fxp
PRO 100's have serious problems in BSD7.
I know the PRO 1000 GT's work flawlessly.
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Ugo Bellavance wrote:
> Chris Buechler wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Ugo Bellavance wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi list,
>>>
>>> We're currently running PfSense 1.2 on
Chris Buechler wrote:
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Ugo Bellavance wrote:
Hi list,
We're currently running PfSense 1.2 on a white-box PC, that costed
nothing... P4 1., 1G RAM, HDD install. Nics: vr (WAN), fxe (3 vlan LAN).
Very robust up to now.
Even the lowest end P4 can push
Tim Dressel wrote:
I've run on a few x3400 and x3500's if you are all about IBM. They run
well, but you will have more stability by throwing in some GT class
intel giganics even if you are running low traffic.
Hi,
I know HP better... The list was mosty IBMs because by coincidence.
I don't kno
