Bill Marquette a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Vick Khera <vi...@khera.org> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Ugo Bellavance <u...@lubik.ca> wrote:
3com 905 (xl)
I'd put this on your WAN and the intel on the LAN. 3Com have been
well support in FreeBSD (and even in the original 4.2BSD before that)
forever.
For a long while, back in the early early days of PC's running BSD's,
I would only buy 3Com NICs, mostly the 509c (which even had barrel
connectors!) and then the 905's when we moved up to the high-speed
ethernets.
Given the use of vlans, I imagine you might have LAN -> LAN
connectivity, the em(4) will provide better throughput than any of the
non-gig cards.
I'll definitely put the em on the lan side, but since this firewall is
mostly to share the internet link, there is barely any vlan-to-vlan
traffic (except for ntp and maybe some other management protocols).
If you have an opportunity to drop an fxp(4) in there
instead of the realtek or 3com cards, you'd be happier, but given only
30mbit throughput requirements, either will handle the traffic. The
Intel card will also do vlan tagging in hardware (and checksumming)
allowing you to save a bit of CPU.
I'll use the em to handle the vlan'd side. I'll check how it goes, as
it will be the first time that I copy a config from one machine to the
other.
I had a ton of those 509c ISA cards back in the day...they almost gave
me 1mbit :) (at least one had AUI, TP, and BNC connectors) I
understand the 3c905 on a PCI bus ran a tad faster *grin*. At any
rate, I second this config...although I've had more than my share of
issues with 3com cards, I'd still pick one over a realtek (and
certainly over a dlink branded realtek).
:)
Thanks,
Ugo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com
Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
