I want to build an Intel Atom-based router; need opinions and suggestions.

S

S-B

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
1,053
Well, I've discovered that my WRT54GL with Tomato (and even worse with DD-WRT) is struggling to keep up with my torrent habits. With uTorrent open, my Internet connection just slows to a crawl. I have tried a plethora of different settings, mostly dealing with QoS, but it just doesn't cut it. The WRT54GL has a limited amount of memory and processing power.

So, I've come across the Intel D945GCLF board with an integrated Atom 230 processor on it. It should be considerably faster than I'll ever need for a router. I'd demote my WRT54GL to wireless-only duty as an access point, with the data being sent through the Atom router. So, I was wondering two things: first, is this the best solution for me? It's quite cheap at ~$60, roughly the cost of my WRT54GL when I bought it, so what else would compare at this price range? Second, what software and/or OS should I get to do this? QoS is important, and if possible, I'd like to "throttle" P2P connections when they are taking up my entire bandwidth while another connection (ie. http) is attempting to connect.

I mean, I can pretty much wing it and put something together, but I want an informed opinion about what the BEST solution is.
 
i was looking at that board a few weeks ago, but it only has 1 network port so you would need to add in another network card in the PCI slot.
 
I've been wanting to get ahold of one and put pfsense on it; that should have the traffic shaping you are looking for, and the system should have no problem handling it. give pfsense a look if you get a chance.
 
YeOldeStonecat said:
Somone installed Untangle on it..plenty of power for that UTM distro.http://forums.untangle.com/showthread.php?t=3721

I'd say PFSense should be the best bet for you..has good QoS features so downloads don't crush your normal traffic.
Click to expand...

QFT, going with a slightly more advanced platform would be a good idea to make good use of the hardware. I have Smoothwall 3 installed on mine and according to my performance logging, the load average doesn't go much above 0.2, even when downloading at full speed with a lot of connections open.
 
they recommend getting a 2port intel nic for it... apparently nix hates the onboard chipset

but i'm happy to see these things getting cheaper.... i've never messed with miniitx because it has always seemed the hardware was too expensive for what you were getting... hopefully another version of this board will come out that fixes the bios and poor network chipset choice (and i guess a power interference issue with some of the connector placement)...

i'll definitely be watching the atom based itx board sector from now on....
 
When I saw the new Atom boards coming out, I really wanted to do exactly what you are doing, but I decided to go a different direction. I ended up getting a cheap $500 laptop. It has a Screen, Keyboard, Battery, 1 Gig of ram, 120 Gig harddrive, Dualcore 1.7 Ghz.

Yes it's way overkill, but I figure it will handle anything I throw at it, plus I get a screen, keyboard/mouse and battery. I am having to deal with a few addons (extra NIC, and a few minor compatibility issues with the onboard devices, but I still feel it's the better solution for me.)
 
LoStMaTt said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813153062

I used this since it comes with 2 NICs onboard. They are both Realtek Gigabit as well!

$99 but you don't have to purchase that extra nic and this thing is ultra low power consumption. You can even remove the little fan on there if you wish.
Click to expand...

The Atom processor is quite a bit more powerful which probably will come in handy if the OP is using UTM functions. If he is just using firewall/routing functions, he would probably be fine.
 
I have a feeling that you are saturating your internet connection rather than your router, thats why your connection is slow. If you opened up a torrent to it's maximum capacity, you will saturate your internet no matter how great of a router you have.

You should rather look at a more modern router with Qos and consider throttling down your torrent caps.
 
This nano processor was able to play Crysis....I think it can handle UTM just fine.
 
The Atom would provide a fantastic platform for building a router. I've been eying them to replace my routers to lower power consumption, but I need 2 PCI slots to add wireless cards. It would be a significantly faster, stable and flexible platform than a consumer grade router.
 
Can anyone recommend a dual-port pci nic for this board?

Also, is there any benefit to going with a GigE card in a broadband router application?
 
Wow, wasn't expecting this much response. I thought maybe one or two people might have something to say, looks like a lot of people are wanting to do the same.


MorfiusX said:
The Atom processor is quite a bit more powerful which probably will come in handy if the OP is using UTM functions. If he is just using firewall/routing functions, he would probably be fine.
Click to expand...
I don't need UTM, but considering the amount of processing power I'd have, I don't see why not to throw some in there.

Ockie said:
I have a feeling that you are saturating your internet connection rather than your router, thats why your connection is slow. If you opened up a torrent to it's maximum capacity, you will saturate your internet no matter how great of a router you have.

You should rather look at a more modern router with Qos and consider throttling down your torrent caps.
Click to expand...
I've checked this many times. Even setting a max download speed far below my actual capabilities slows it down. It's definitely the router.

dandragonrage said:
Via Nano is about twice the speed of a C7. Atom is slightly behind Nano.
Click to expand...
If I could get the Nano, I would. It's not out yet. It would destroy the Atom when it comes to encryption, and that would be something I'd be very interested in for when I need to remotely access my network.


So, thanks for the suggestions guys. I was expecting pfSense, and it looks like I was right.

As for hardware... I will need at least 5 ports, preferably 6. That means I'd have to get a 4-port ethernet card. I found a ZNYX ZX346Q for $45, looks solid. Only 10/100, but that's fast enough for streaming 40 Mbit 1080p over the network. I could throw on a USB-to-ethernet adapter I have for a total of 6 RJ45.

For the PSU, there's always picoPSU, but those are overly expensive for what they do. Yes, they're efficient, but I could just get a Fortron <300W for considerably less.

For the disk, I was thinking about maybe some kind of small solid-state disk or flash memory card. The only problem here would be the limited write cycles. Is there some way of making pfSense semi-read-only? ie. store everything in RAM until there is almost none left, then write logs to disk if necessary.

Edit: Sweet. Just found out this thing has HyperThreading.
 
If you are not routing between 6 subnets, you don't need 6 ports. Use this device as as firewall only and add an additional switch on the internal network.
 
what do you need 6 ports on your router for?


MorfiusX said:
If you are not routing between 6 subnets, you don't need 6 ports. Use this device as as firewall only and add an additional switch on the internal network.
Click to expand...

exactly....
 
MorfiusX said:
If you are not routing between 6 subnets, you don't need 6 ports. Use this device as as firewall only and add an additional switch on the internal network.
Click to expand...
It's the most compact method. By keeping everything on-board, I can just mount this one thing into a wall or something. Having a switch forces me to use more space. Though the one major benefit to a switch would be the ability to add in more clients at a considerably lower cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top