Dual NICs on motherboards - Purpose?

[HHunt]

VLANs , proper switch gear, and routers are for connecting 2 networks. Not dual NIC's ... ever heard of 802.3ad, 802.1q? Link aggregation on a nice switch with proper 802.3ad support = redundancy and traffice teaming. Rudementary understanding does not make your answer intelligent either. Please sit while the grown-ups talk.

In the nicest possible way: You're being obnoxious. You might know things, but not the appropriate places to flaunt them. Your response is roughly the equivalent of storming into a car discussion and complaining that they're all idiots because they don't use the same gear as F1 drivers, nor know the appropriate standards and jargon for it. Had this been Gen[M]ay I'd have paid for a 24hour ban for you to reconsider and cool down.

Is that clear enough?

 

[HHunt]

Of course. The statement "nVidia being the better of the two" only works in the Windows world. From my limited experience with BSD by using m0n0wall, if you want the best performing NIC, it's Intel.

I can not quote exact numbers and I do not plan on retesting, but I did try both the nVidia and 3Com NF2 NIC's out on WinXP, and the CPU load is considerably lower using the nVidia NIC. Nothing to get too excited about, but if you are gaming and every little bit of CPU processing power counts, then nVidia is your better choice.

Ah, another m0n0wall user.
I though about it and concluded that since my internet connection is a mere 4000/400 kbit, even an 10Mbit card (or two) won't be a bottleneck. It seems to work out nicely. If one of them or the computer in question decides to give up, that's not a very big problem for me. I've got more computers and more cards, and my time is cheap.
(I said ISA earlier, but they're actually PCI. Doesn't make them any newer.)

I read a few articles and have to agree: It seems like nVidia has fast hardware. I don't know if the assorted problems I've heard of (and seen) have been dealt with, nor if they were software or hardware. Let's hope the OSS drivers catch up sometime, and we'll see.

 

[Orinthical]

Whoever gets the motherboard can do all they want, but the manufacturers didn't really have a purpose set in mind (as least I don't think)... If they did, it CERTAINLY wasn't teaming or load balancing, because these boards are totally not marketed towards the server crowd. Dead horse, though.

Yes, beating a dead horse.

The Op asked a vague question so he/she will get vague answers and plenty of opinions.

But to add to your statement; It really depends on the board... some that come with cheaper 'one realtek and one 3com' NICs in them would probably not be suited towards an enthusiast with teaming in mind - however there are a few enthusiast boards that would seem quite comfortable doing so. I'm speaking of the boards that offer dual intel or broadcom gigabit NICs. Both intel's PROset and Broadcom's BACS/BASP will work with these desktop boards.

Do users HAVE to use them for teaming? Of course not... but the option is there on some of the 'premium' boards.

In the end... there really isn't a point to having dual NIC's on a basic gaming machine aside from obviously raising the price point and the only benefit I could see to having such a setup would be for either ICS... or if the machine was going to need to be teamed as a server at a LAN party.

No point in arguing or beating a dead horse any longer for me... if you have a direct question please feel free to PM me.

 

[Met-AL]

Ah, another m0n0wall user.
I though about it and concluded that since my internet connection is a mere 4000/400 kbit, even an 10Mbit card (or two) won't be a bottleneck. It seems to work out nicely. If one of them or the computer in question decides to give up, that's not a very big problem for me. I've got more computers and more cards, and my time is cheap.
(I said ISA earlier, but they're actually PCI. Doesn't make them any newer.)

I read a few articles and have to agree: It seems like nVidia has fast hardware. I don't know if the assorted problems I've heard of (and seen) have been dealt with, nor if they were software or hardware. Let's hope the OSS drivers catch up sometime, and we'll see.

I'm running my m0n0wall on a IBM Netfinity 4000R 1U P3 server. It has dual onboard Intel FPX NIC's. Latency from the m0n0wall is <1ms. This is coupled with my Cisco Catalyst 2820 switch...

I really like my m0n0wall and would recommend it to anyone that wants something more than a typical SOHO router.

 

[HHunt]

I'm running my m0n0wall on a IBM Netfinity 4000R 1U P3 server. It has dual onboard Intel FPX NIC's. Latency from the m0n0wall is <1ms. This is coupled with my Cisco Catalyst 2820 switch...

I really like my m0n0wall and would recommend it to anyone that wants something more than a typical SOHO router.

Yeah, it seems quite scalable. I use hardware worth less than your rackmount chassis, and it's perfectly decent as an internet router with NAT. Better than the 3com router it replaced, at least. I seem to recall that JuniperOS is based in part on FreeBSD, so it's probably not the worst base for something pushing packets.

BTW, there was a really inconclusive thread in the OS forum a while ago. Do you happen to have the tools at hand to see how many packages/second it can handle?

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

VLANs , proper switch gear, and routers are for connecting 2 networks. Not dual NIC's ... ever heard of 802.3ad, 802.1q? .

So where does Microsoft ISA Server stand? Or the older Proxy products? Or other 3rd party proxy like products like Sygate, Wingate, and the plethora of other 3rd party software ICS products?

Where does .Q trunking fit into this?

 

[mikeblas]

because a soho router sucks compared to a properly built *nix router

How so?

I've been running a Watchguard firewall for a long time; a Soho TC 5. You can get 'em on eBay for less than $50 these days. I haven't ever wanted to configure in a way that it wouldn't let me do, or found that it was a performance problem.

As such, I can't imagine spending the money on even a cheap machine with spinning storage; or the extra electricity or lost stability.

What am I missing in not using a general purpose PC for my firewall?

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

How so?

As such, I can't imagine spending the money on even a cheap machine with spinning storage; or the extra electricity or lost stability.

What am I missing in not using a general purpose PC for my firewall?

Yeah, no kidding! I've worked with a decent majority of different brands, and there are plenty of true SOHO routers that are incredible. Not everyone HAS to have a ghetto router running *nix just so they can brag that they run *nix.

 

[HHunt]

Yeah, no kidding! I've worked with a decent majority of different brands, and there are plenty of true SOHO routers that are incredible. Not everyone HAS to have a ghetto router running *nix just so they can brag that they run *nix.

"Ghetto" is a fair description of my setup, so I'll chime in.
The things I like about m0n0wall can be summarized as:
* Apparent stability. (The 3com router it replaced dropped the aDSL connection now and then; This works perfectly.)
* Good web interface (I've seen my fair share of cheap home routers, and they're more often than not showcases of bad usability)
* Queues and pipes (Want to put certain kinds of traffic in a pipe with a maximum bandwidth and a lower priority? Sure.)
* DynDNS support (Some other routers do this as well, and some don't. I quite appreciate having it.)
* All the things most/all routers do well. (Firewall, NAT, the works. It's good at this, but so's everything else.)

I can't say "stability under load" or "performance", solely because I've never put it in a situation where it could show off. (Pushing an aDSL line wouldn't stress a gameboy.)
I have merely looked at the SNMP monitoring, and I haven't even touched the VPN support.
As for unix bragging rights, a system without a shell doesn't count; It's more of an appliance. Besides, I've got enough unix boxes as it is.

The power usage isn't a problem. It's mostly heat anyway, so it's not a waste most of the year. Besides, with the price of power here, the $50 premium is enough to pay for several years worth of use in the months I don't need heating.

Having a HD running 24/7 isn't ideal. It's only accessed at boot, so I'll see if it's possible to have the BIOS spin it down after a while. If not, I might invest in a CF->IDE adapter and use a spare 8mb card to cut down on the noise, sometime. As for reliability, it's good enough. It'll keep running until reboot time even if the HD dies, and the things that might cause it to reboot are a bigger worry to me than having to get the backup router up.

In short: I cobbled it together from spare parts and it does everything I'd expect from a good SOHO router and more. The downsides are well within my tolerances. Why spend money on another router?
In most situations I will agree that a normal router would work just as well, with less noise and power usage.
In some situations m0n0wall might be better for it's features (look through their page and see if there's anything you like), and in those cases it's possible to streamline the hardware by using a soekris device or a rackmount server, depending on the power needed.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

HHunt, I wasn't attacking *nix routers, it's the approach I don't like of "holier than thou what I run is better than yours".

I come from the camp of "There are usually dozens of solutions to accomplish the same thing, and there are many different solutions that work for many different people. What's good for one isn't necessarily the best for another."

Also when I read "SOHO" router, I'm not thinking about the "under 100 dollar home grade routers"...SOHO to me means the more mid-range, business grade routers. Costing from 200 - 600 bucks or so. Sonicwalls, little Cisco PIX 501s, Linksys RV0 series, Watchguards, etc. One won't experience the connects or need to reboot when using better quality devices like those, that they do with humble 49 dollar home grade routers with barely a 100MHz CPU and 4 megs of RAM.

I can go on listing the features I love about the Linksys/Cisco RV082 routers and comparing against m0n0...but that goes against my point...

 

[HHunt]

HHunt, I wasn't attacking *nix routers, it's the approach I don't like of "holier than thou what I run is better than yours".

I come from the camp of "There are usually dozens of solutions to accomplish the same thing, and there are many different solutions that work for many different people. What's good for one isn't necessarily the best for another."

Also when I read "SOHO" router, I'm not thinking about the "under 100 dollar home grade routers"...SOHO to me means the more mid-range, business grade routers. Costing from 200 - 600 bucks or so. Sonicwalls, little Cisco PIX 501s, Linksys RV0 series, Watchguards, etc. One won't experience the connects or need to reboot when using better quality devices like those, that they do with humble 49 dollar home grade routers with barely a 100MHz CPU and 4 megs of RAM.

I can go on listing the features I love about the Linksys/Cisco RV082 routers and comparing against m0n0...but that goes against my point...

Heh, yeah. I'm to tired to be posting, really.
I went back and moderated myself a bit; hope it helps.
As for "holier than thou", I can't say I've noticed it. There seems to be an agreement that m0n0wall performs well, but that doesn't mean that we think it should be used to replace all commercial firewalls and routers. In some settings, it's a very decent alternative. One of these is as a solid home router, which sort of was my point.

Another thing: For $150 I could get a PC Engines WRAP.1E-1, put m0n0wall on it, and have a small, quiet, box with no moving parts. I'm honestly curious as to how it would compare in different settings.
(It's a 266MHz geode, 128Mb - affair. Very low-power. [1] )

[1] It can be driven by Power-over-Ethernet, which is sort of impressive.

 

[mikeblas]

* Apparent stability. (The 3com router it replaced dropped the aDSL connection now and then; This works perfectly.)
* Good web interface (I've seen my fair share of cheap home routers, and they're more often than not showcases of bad usability)
* Queues and pipes (Want to put certain kinds of traffic in a pipe with a maximum bandwidth and a lower priority? Sure.)
* DynDNS support (Some other routers do this as well, and some don't. I quite appreciate having it.)
* All the things most/all routers do well. (Firewall, NAT, the works. It's good at this, but so's everything else.)

My Watchguard Soho does all that. Admittedly, I paid about $300 when I bought it new in 1998 or 1999. You can get the same box for less than $50; you can get the newer Soho 6 for about $125-ish.

The products do all that, plus are VPN-capable. The web-based UI is fine by me -- it's as good as any web-based UI I've used, at any rate. Even if it was crappy, I don't reconfigure it enough to really be bothered by the UI.

What's "Queues an pipes"? You're saying it supports additional NICs? Or that it can prioritize the packets it is processig? I can't imagine why I'd want the latter in a Soho application.

Sure, it's fun to build a PC-based firewall as a project. Educational, even. But at a certain point, I just need something that I set and forget. I've got plenty of other things to do and learn and work on.

My slowest machine takes about 90 watts. The red box takes about 9; 81 watts for a month is about $4.50 in electricity alone. You'll have to replace the hard drive every so often, and heat is a consideration.

So I'm still not sure I see what the benefit is. You've got something that could be better; you're thinking of throwing more money at it. In fact, admit that an appliance solution is equal and has less disadvantages.

Maybe there's a point where a PC is better; a small company with 50 machines and lots of traffic, or so. Then, the class of appliance router you'd need would probably be more expensive than a run-down PC. But the whole business goes down because of a drive crash? That's just not acceptable.

 

[HHunt]

My Watchguard Soho does all that. Admittedly, I paid about $300 when I bought it new in 1998 or 1999. You can get the same box for less than $50; you can get the newer Soho 6 for about $125-ish.

The parts happened to be free for me, so that's sort of moot.

The products do all that, plus are VPN-capable. The web-based UI is fine by me -- it's as good as any web-based UI I've used, at any rate. Even if it was crappy, I don't reconfigure it enough to really be bothered by the UI.
M0n0wall does VPN as well, not that I use it. I don't doubt that your firewall has a good web interface, it's an old-but-good instead of new-but-cheap. I also doubt it's significantly better. Draw?

What's "Queues and pipes"? You're saying it supports additional NICs? Or that it can prioritize the packets it is processig? I can't imagine why I'd want the latter in a Soho application.
Pf-style naming for ways to shape traffic. Very convenient if you want to limit bulk data transfers or play with priorities, but how useful that is depends on what you're doing. It can be a good way to get decent latency in online games while there's a lot of other traffic, for one thing. I'm also considering to give ssh a very high priority, just for the convenience.


Sure, it's fun to build a PC-based firewall as a project. Educational, even. But at a certain point, I just need something that I set and forget. I've got plenty of other things to do and learn and work on.
Put two cards in a MB. Stuff HD in another computer, dd an image over, plug HD in MB, turn power on. Done. I haven't considered that educational for some years, and it's hardly challenging enough to be fun.
It's also perfectly simple to maintain: Don't touch it except for pushing the "update firmware"-button when you feel like it.


My slowest machine takes about 90 watts. The red box takes about 9; 81 watts for a month is about $4.50 in electricity alone. You'll have to replace the hard drive every so often, and heat is a consideration.
I did address that, but I'll do it again. For $50 (the cost of an old, good, firewall on ebay), I can use it for 10 months before it would have paid for itself. If I only count months where I don't need heating anyway, that turns into a few years. (This is a cold country.) Remember that 90W of electricity used is 90W of heat that would have cost me roughly the same to get from another source. (This house is heated by electricity, and a kerosene stove in the coldest periods. Kerosene is not that much cheaper per kWh.)
The HD I currently use is '94 vintage, so it might indeed give in soon. When it does, I'll spend some paltry sum on a CF->IDE adapter and use a spare CF card, or just pull another one from the pile for free.
Also, the HD is completely untouched except for when it boots. I should be able to get it to spin down after x minutes of inactivity. With a few minutes of use a month, it might last a while.


So I'm still not sure I see what the benefit is. You've got something that could be better; you're thinking of throwing more money at it. In fact, admit that an appliance solution is equal and has less disadvantages.
I'll admit that if I had both in front of me, the non-PC solution would be better. I don't, and for what I consider equal functionality [1] at a higher price (unless counted over several years), I won't bother buying one. Besides, the shipping from most eBay sellers to me is atrocious, a very real problem.

Maybe there's a point where a PC is better; a small company with 50 machines and lots of traffic, or so. Then, the class of appliance router you'd need would probably be more expensive than a run-down PC. But the whole business goes down because of a drive crash? That's just not acceptable.
That's why you use a CF card. And also: that's why you have a spare one at hand with an identical setup loaded. Monowall doesn't care if a drive dies until you try to reboot it, in which case something else is already wrong, or you're there to do the card swap. Not that CF cards are known for crashing.
(FTR: Monowall is about 5Mb big, so an 8Mb CF card will do nicely.)

[1] Because the drawbacks happen to work well for me

 

[noobman]

I've seen a lot of these new motherboards that have 2 on-board NICs...just wondering what the purpose of this is? Is there someway to get 2x the bandwidth?

Maybe you want to configure your network so that your machine is directly connected to the internet, and your other machines connect through your system??


Maybe you want to run two networks?

There's lots of reasons... if you can't find a use, too bad for you

 

[mikeblas]

Pf-style naming for ways to shape traffic.

I see. I think my switch does this; I don't use it.

Put two cards in a MB. Stuff HD in another computer, dd an image over, plug HD in MB, turn power on. Done. I haven't considered that educational for some years, and it's hardly challenging enough to be fun.

You're skipping tweaking, tuning, studying, and so on. You get out of it wht you put into it, just like anything else in life.

I'll admit that if I had both in front of me, the non-PC solution would be better.

I see.

 

[Met-AL]

Yeah, it seems quite scalable. I use hardware worth less than your rackmount chassis, and it's perfectly decent as an internet router with NAT. Better than the 3com router it replaced, at least. I seem to recall that JuniperOS is based in part on FreeBSD, so it's probably not the worst base for something pushing packets.

BTW, there was a really inconclusive thread in the OS forum a while ago. Do you happen to have the tools at hand to see how many packages/second it can handle?

No I dont. All I can tell you is that there is absolutely no latency from it and it can handle the bandwidth of my connection which averages at 12000kbps. I never thought about checking latency with my old setup Celeron 400 and realtek NIC's.

The reason I like and need m0n0wall over a cheapo router is the port forwarding to different ports that most routers lack. At work, they filter out most traffic so that only HTTP and HTTPS go thru. Nothing else.. no POP..no FTP..nothing. Darn SOX act. So to connect to my network at home and "play" around I point remote desktop to my IP and use port 443 and m0n0wall redirects that to my desktop PC port 3389.

My hardware is severe overkill, but I wanted a 1U to go with my Cisco Catalyst 3U switch. I purchased the switch of ebay for under $50 and it has two add in modules for 100mb. I purchased the IBM server off of ebay for $98. I made a rack cabinet for them with a glass door and it looks pretty cool. I am gonna put my file/web/game server PC in a 2U chassis soon and add that to my rack cabinet. Like I said tho, severe overkill, but thats the point!!

 

[Met-AL]

Having a HD running 24/7 isn't ideal. It's only accessed at boot, so I'll see if it's possible to have the BIOS spin it down after a while. If not, I might invest in a CF->IDE adapter and use a spare 8mb card to cut down on the noise, sometime. As for reliability, it's good enough. It'll keep running until reboot time even if the HD dies, and the things that might cause it to reboot are a bigger worry to me than having to get the backup router up.
.

New version of m0n0wall has IDE spindown for IDE drives. I yanked out my SCSI drive and threw in an old IDE drive just for this feature. 1 minute after boot it shuts off and of course never turns on except when you change a setting or a config.

To the guy that is bashing people for not using a router instead of our Unix firewalls. It's all about tinkering... just like these guys that cut holes, add lights, paint and mod their cases. I dont see the point myself, but they enjoy it. I prefer m0n0wall/Smoothwall/IPCop over routers. I even have a SonicWall "Internet Security Appliance" and loath it. It has a terrible interface and is slow and has to restart everytime you make rule or port forwarding change.

 

[HHunt]

I see. I think my switch does this; I don't use it.
I've used it, and it worked. It's not enabled right now, FWIW.

You're skipping tweaking, tuning, studying, and so on. You get out of it wht you put into it, just like anything else in life.
I don't see why it should require more of that than any other router?

I see.
Now that's a sentence that depends on the intonation.
(Imagine the guy from CSI:Miami saying it.)

 

[HHunt]

New version of m0n0wall has IDE spindown for IDE drives. I yanked out my SCSI drive and threw in an old IDE drive just for this feature. 1 minute after boot it shuts off and of course never turns on except when you change a setting or a config.

Ah, time to update.

 

[PopeKevinI]

Because 2 Gb > 1 Gb

Some operating systems let you use more than one NIC to add bandwidth.

 

[Wolf-R1]

How so?

I've been running a Watchguard firewall for a long time; a Soho TC 5. You can get 'em on eBay for less than $50 these days. I haven't ever wanted to configure in a way that it wouldn't let me do, or found that it was a performance problem.

As such, I can't imagine spending the money on even a cheap machine with spinning storage; or the extra electricity or lost stability.

What am I missing in not using a general purpose PC for my firewall?

<ahem> I hate to rain on your parade but...the Watchguard firewalls are "hardened Linux" machines. So essentially you're arguing that he's correct.

 

[mikeblas]

<ahem> I hate to rain on your parade but...the Watchguard firewalls are "hardened Linux" machines. So essentially you're arguing that he's correct.

I'm well-aware they're running Linux. They're certainly not general-purpose computers: no video, zero expansion (except maybe SMD soldering some memory on), no spinng storage, no standardized I/O ports, and so on.

I'm sorry it wasn't clear to you -- I'm not arguing against Linux. I'm wondering why people use a general purpose PC for something task-specific.

 

[PopeKevinI]

I'm well-aware they're running Linux. They're certainly not general-purpose computers: no video, zero expansion (except maybe SMD soldering some memory on), no spinng storage, no standardized I/O ports, and so on.

I'm sorry it wasn't clear to you -- I'm not arguing against Linux. I'm wondering why people use a general purpose PC for something task-specific.

Off-the-shelf parts, greater control, et cetera.

You can use any old PC with two NICs and you have a router. No proprietary hardware, no risk of long waits for parts (assuming you have access to PC components). And with a full install of Linux, you don't have to deal with web or console interfaces that don't let you do exactly what you want.

 

[mikeblas]

Off-the-shelf parts, greater control, et cetera.

You can use any old PC with two NICs and you have a router. No proprietary hardware, no risk of long waits for parts (assuming you have access to PC components). And with a full install of Linux, you don't have to deal with web or console interfaces that don't let you do exactly what you want.

For about what I'd spend for a good gigabit NIC, I can completely replace my Soho 5 with a used box off ebay.

What specific control is missing? What am I unable to do from the TELNET console or the HTTP interface on my Soho 5 that I'd want to do with m0n0wall's setup?

 

[Wolf-R1]

I'm well-aware they're running Linux. They're certainly not general-purpose computers: no video, zero expansion (except maybe SMD soldering some memory on), no spinng storage, no standardized I/O ports, and so on.

I'm sorry it wasn't clear to you -- I'm not arguing against Linux. I'm wondering why people use a general purpose PC for something task-specific.

I do see your point but for the most part running the kind of firewall you're asking about usually involves a greater degree of flexibility not to mention extremely cheap hardware that can be used. In my case, both at home and at work, I use older PCs for that kind of task.

 

[mikeblas]

I do see your point but for the most part running the kind of firewall you're asking about usually involves a greater degree of flexibility not to mention extremely cheap hardware that can be used. In my case, both at home and at work, I use older PCs for that kind of task.

I'm sorry, Wolf-R1, but I can't make much sense of your response: What kind of firewall do you think I am talking about? A greater degree of flexibility than what?

 

[PopeKevinI]

For about what I'd spend for a good gigabit NIC, I can completely replace my Soho 5 with a used box off ebay.

And there's the problem with your logic. We're not talking about buying a PC off eBay. We're talking about building one out of spare parts, or simply recycling an otherwise unuseable one.

I'll be getting an old 450 Mhz system back from a family member in a month or two...got any suggestions for what to do with it besides making a router or some other kind of dedicated network appliance?

 

[HHunt]

And indeed - how often does a router/firewall need to handle Gbit traffic?
If you can afford that kind of bandwidth, the price of a router isn't exactly a concern.
If you're using it between local networks, well, that's still a situation that suggests a decent IT budget.

More generally, I think you're trying to argue against a different case than we're making. My point is: For a total cost of $0, I got a firewall and router that's better than a cheap new one, and comparable to an used, better one. There's specific drawbacks (somewhat higher power use, noise), but I can live with these.

Others have different uses and reasons, of course. One nice thing is that a generic PC can be set up to do almost everything, so for any specific need there's a suitable minidistro. The moment a commercial router can't do what you want it to, you're out of luck. (In my case, it was DynDNS notification. I could have used a client on one of the other computers, but that has its own problems.)

 

[Wolf-R1]

I'm sorry, Wolf-R1, but I can't make much sense of your response: What kind of firewall do you think I am talking about? A greater degree of flexibility than what?

Mostly what I'm thinking about is the cheap hardware that you can use to run a firewall of this caliber. Not to mention you can add interfaces fairly cheap instead of paying someone (ie- Cisco) gobs of money for a "certified" NIC that's really nothing more than and off the shelf unit with their blessing, assuming we're talking about a firewall that can add or subtract NICs.

Furthermore if you need to replace components it's fairly inexpensive to do so for the reasons mentioned above. You can have shelf replacement parts readily avaliable versus having to depot parts for x number of hours/days.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Recycling old computer parts is far from the top reasons in my mind for diving into trying a m0n0wall or Smoothwall in the next couple of months...as I'll be going out of my way to find an ultra small form factor Pentium 3 case or something...

"What else to do with that old PII 400 Aunt Hilda is throwing away?" Straight to the garbage would be my answer, I don't want some hulking metal case monstrocity making more noise, using gobs of electricity, and spewing more heat into my office...not to mention taking up lots of space.

I'm already dreading the space that an ultra small form factor would take up on my cabinet somewhere in my office. Can't beat a nice tidy small router for that category.

 

[PopeKevinI]

Recycling old computer parts is far from the top reasons in my mind for diving into trying a m0n0wall or Smoothwall in the next couple of months...as I'll be going out of my way to find an ultra small form factor Pentium 3 case or something...

"What else to do with that old PII 400 Aunt Hilda is throwing away?" Straight to the garbage would be my answer, I don't want some hulking metal case monstrocity making more noise, using gobs of electricity, and spewing more heat into my office...not to mention taking up lots of space.

I'm already dreading the space that an ultra small form factor would take up on my cabinet somewhere in my office. Can't beat a nice tidy small router for that category.

When I get through with it:

K6-2 450 with a passive heatsink and 256 MB RAM on a microATX board. It'll boot off a freebie USB drive I have (I know it'll boot from USB). I can run it off a very small power supply and cool it with a pair of quiet 80 mm fans. I'm building a wood case out of scrap lumber from other projects.

In other words, it'll be relatively small, attractive, quiet, and efficient. And it'll be far more powerful than the average cheap router

 

[mikeblas]

In other words, it'll be relatively small, attractive, quiet, and efficient. And it'll be far more powerful than the average cheap router

How so?

 

[PopeKevinI]

How so?

Find me a $50 router (and "you can get one on eBay" doesn't count...eBay isn't a reliable source for...well...anything) that's as powerful and flexible as Linux.

 

[mikeblas]

Find me a $50 router (and "you can get one on eBay" doesn't count...eBay isn't a reliable source for...well...anything) that's as powerful and flexible as Linux.

How does one compare a router to an operating system?

 

[HHunt]

How does one compare a router to an operating system?

Strictly speaking correct. Try "that's as powerful and flexible as the set of available linux and BSD - based routing distros".

 

[PopeKevinI]

Strictly speaking correct. Try "that's as powerful and flexible as the set of available linux and BSD - based routing distros".

Raise you hand if you didn't know what I meant by "Linux" in the context of this thread.

 

[HHunt]

Raise you hand if you didn't know what I meant by "Linux" in the context of this thread.

*Keeps hands down*
There's a reason I put "strictly speaking" in there.

 

[doh]

I'll be using boards with two nics in a box that will have five mini-itx boards in it and a simple switch so those machines can talk to each other. I would like the box to be standalone and the slave machines unable to talk to the outside world except through the master (which can sanitise traffic) node.

The two NICs on the master can easily let this cluster be "plug and play" when I need it to talk to another network.

Hardcore segmenting.

 

[QwertyJuan]

Why do you need gb cards for a router mikeblas?

I have a ipcop running now... old machine with two 10BaseT nics, unless you had some sorta UBER internet, how do you expect to bottle-neck even a 10BaseT nic?? I bet there aren't 10 people on this board that have internet faster than 1.25 MEGABYTES per second....

QJ

P.S. FAST internet would be classified as an 8mb line(which I have here) and even if I can find a site that will give me my full speed, it doesn't bog the cards down at all....

 

[mikeblas]

Why do you need gb cards for a router mikeblas?

I don't. The price of a gigabit card came up just as a convenient price point, and the actual item is isn't relevant or an implied requirement. It may as well have been dinner at Applebee's, or a tank of gas.