Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Suggested Hardware for 1Gbit Throughput / 100% working Hardware-Suggestion

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    31 Posts 9 Posters 11.4k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • C
      CryoGenID
      last edited by

      Thansk for your reply!

      We have only two slots in the DL, which are both occupied by the Intel Gbit-NICs and the Blade has all
      ports onboard anyway.
      So as the Blade has everything onboard, I am quite sure that I cannot have an IRQ-Conflict, right?

      But I will have a look into the BIOS of the Blade but I am not sure if I can change anything there  :(

      Doesn't anybody have a 100% running pfSense on a standard 1U or 2U Server and can tell me the server-details?  :(

      Thanks a lot!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        sai
        last edited by

        Recommended Hardware Vendors

        http://pfsense.com/index.php?id=40

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • C
          CryoGenID
          last edited by

          Thanks for your reply, I've already looked there but didn't find any
          device/vendor who has a device with 4 Gbit-NICs, and a really
          powerful cpu.
          We've now contact to NexCom, and they will provide us with a test-device
          of their product line.
          It will have a 3.2 P4-CPU, 1 GB Ram and 4 GBit NICs.

          I've already asked in another thread, but does anybody know I can test
          the maximum FW-Throughput as soon as we get the demo-device?

          Thanks for your help!

          Best regards,

          Christian

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • H
            hoba
            last edited by

            I use netio for testing throughput. however you need 2 systems capable of producing 1 gbit traffic then (test with both trafficgenerators connected with a crossovercable first) or have several netios running between several systems simmultaneously unless you want to use some expensive hardware trafficgenerators.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • C
              CryoGenID
              last edited by

              Hoba, thanks for your reply!

              Well as soon as we've got the test-device and have managed to install pfSense
              on it (as it has no graphic-card, we need to work with that serial-port thing… can
              we use the "standard" pfSense or do we need to use the embedded-version?)
              I'll try to use the Blade to generate the traffic...

              I hope to find a tutorial for netio somewhere on the internet  :)

              Thanks a lot for your reply and help!

              Hopefully everything works then with the device...

              Do you think that 3.2 Ghz P4 will have enough power for Gigabit Throuput on the bridge?

              Best regards,

              Chris

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H
                hoba
                last edited by

                The nexcoms usually have a com1 console redirection feature in the bios. I think it should work fine with that. I haven't tested gigabit performance yet so I'm interested in reading results from your tests.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • C
                  CryoGenID
                  last edited by

                  Sure, I'll keep you informed when I have managed to get the test-environment up and running…
                  May I contact you in case I need help with that?

                  Thanks!

                  Best regards,

                  Christian

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • C
                    CryoGenID
                    last edited by

                    Hello again  ;)

                    Well the NexCom was unfortunately a complete flop  :'(

                    It has Marvell Chips on-board and they are not recognized by pfSense at all…
                    Slowly I really start to think that pfSense HATES me  :'( :'(

                    Well for my last try to get this working:
                    Will pfSense run on this hardware here perfectly:

                    • Intel® 3010 (Mukilteo 2) Chipset 1066/800/533MHz FSB
                    • 4xSATA-2 (ICH7R) with RAID 0/1
                    • 2x GigaBit LAN (Intel® 82573V PCI-Express)
                    • Intel® Xeon® 3060 S775 2,40GHz 4MB FSB1066
                    • 2 x 1024MB DDR2 FSB667 unbuffered ECC
                    • 2x Hitachi 80GB SATA-2 7200U 8MB Cache
                    • PCI-X 133MHz Risercard for Intel Dual Port NIC Pro/1000 MT

                    Could anybody give me a definite "Go" for this system or does anybody know of any
                    component which makes a "No-Go" for pfSense?

                    Does anybody use this Intel Dual Port pro /1000 MT - NIC successfully with pfSense?
                    (Without those packet-problems we have here?)

                    Or is there any Dell-Server known as 100% functioning with pfSense?

                    Thanks for your answers :-)

                    Best regards,

                    Christian

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • J
                      jeroen234
                      last edited by

                      @CryoGenID:

                      Hello again  ;)

                      Well the NexCom was unfortunately a complete flop  :'(

                      It has Marvell Chips on-board and they are not recognized by pfSense at all…
                      Slowly I really start to think that pfSense HATES me  :'( :'(

                      did you test it with one of the latest snapshops of pfsense ???
                      they use a newer version of freebsd so they suport more hardware
                      then the 1.0.1 version

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • C
                        CryoGenID
                        last edited by

                        Yes I did… I used the newest Version on the Server  :(
                        But thanks for your hint  ;)

                        Does anybody see a "blocking point" with the hardware-config I posted above?

                        Thanks!

                        Best regards,

                        Christian

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J
                          Jonb
                          last edited by

                          To me the config doesn't seem much different from your blade server.  Why don't you try the through put on the blade server with the firewall allowing a stright pass through and see what happens then.

                          Correct me if I am wrong though I thought that the firewall didn't work on bridge mode unless you changed the settings from the default.

                          @CryoGenID:

                          Hello again  ;)

                          Well the NexCom was unfortunately a complete flop  :'(

                          It has Marvell Chips on-board and they are not recognized by pfSense at all…
                          Slowly I really start to think that pfSense HATES me  :'( :'(

                          Well for my last try to get this working:
                          Will pfSense run on this hardware here perfectly:

                          • Intel® 3010 (Mukilteo 2) Chipset 1066/800/533MHz FSB
                          • 4xSATA-2 (ICH7R) with RAID 0/1
                          • 2x GigaBit LAN (Intel® 82573V PCI-Express)
                          • Intel® Xeon® 3060 S775 2,40GHz 4MB FSB1066
                          • 2 x 1024MB DDR2 FSB667 unbuffered ECC
                          • 2x Hitachi 80GB SATA-2 7200U 8MB Cache
                          • PCI-X 133MHz Risercard for Intel Dual Port NIC Pro/1000 MT

                          Could anybody give me a definite "Go" for this system or does anybody know of any
                          component which makes a "No-Go" for pfSense?

                          Does anybody use this Intel Dual Port pro /1000 MT - NIC successfully with pfSense?
                          (Without those packet-problems we have here?)

                          Or is there any Dell-Server known as 100% functioning with pfSense?

                          Thanks for your answers :-)

                          Best regards,

                          Christian

                          Hosted desktops and servers with support without complication.
                          www.blueskysystems.co.uk

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • H
                            hoba
                            last edited by

                            Firewall works on bridges if you enable it at system>advanced.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • C
                              CryoGenID
                              last edited by

                              As we want to support pfSense because we think it is a really great software,
                              we have just made an arrangement with a company, which is selling powerful
                              servers to make them run with pfSense.
                              We'll pay them for the set-up of a 1 HE-Box which will run smoothly with the newest
                              snapshot.
                              That will be our first sponsorship for this wonderful project.

                              You can then add them to the verified hardware-list and then have the possibility to
                              get pfsense into those areas where really huge throughputs are needed (as most of
                              the currently suggested hardware is not that powerful).

                              I hope that we have invested our money well for this project!

                              We will keep you updated on the progress….

                              Best regards,

                              Christian

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • J
                                Jonb
                                last edited by

                                Yes that is what I ment be it isn't on by default is it???

                                I would presume by the firewall not being on the processor speed doesn't make a difference for the through put unless it is really slow. (I mean that the proc must meet the rquirements to handle 1GB data traffic)

                                Hosted desktops and servers with support without complication.
                                www.blueskysystems.co.uk

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • C
                                  CryoGenID
                                  last edited by

                                  Jonb,

                                  regarding the bridge: You have to activate it manually. Per default it is deactivated!

                                  Regarding the CPU:
                                  Well I think it is a combination of everything. Like when we test the throughput and have around 526 MBit/second with 130kbyte-TCP-Packets, our CPU is at 70% (tested on an old P-III with 1.3 Ghz and 3 GB Ram)
                                  So the new System will have the power of not only handling the throughput but also (if needed later) AV-Scans etc.  :)

                                  Best regards,

                                  Chris

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • J
                                    Jonb
                                    last edited by

                                    Sorry I should claritfy it better. What I ment is that if you enable the bridge over two connections on PFsense it will not pass the packets through the firewall roules. Like hoba said you can enable it in the advanced section of the setuo. Is this something you have done or are you just trying to get the firewall to act as a hub.

                                    @CryoGenID:

                                    Jonb,

                                    regarding the bridge: You have to activate it manually. Per default it is deactivated!

                                    Regarding the CPU:
                                    Well I think it is a combination of everything. Like when we test the throughput and have around 526 MBit/second with 130kbyte-TCP-Packets, our CPU is at 70% (tested on an old P-III with 1.3 Ghz and 3 GB Ram)
                                    So the new System will have the power of not only handling the throughput but also (if needed later) AV-Scans etc.  :)

                                    Best regards,

                                    Chris

                                    Hosted desktops and servers with support without complication.
                                    www.blueskysystems.co.uk

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • C
                                      CryoGenID
                                      last edited by

                                      Hey ;-)

                                      I yes of course a bridge uses the firewall rules  :)

                                      That's what a bridge is for… It sits transparently in front of your servers and only let's those packets through
                                      which are allowed...

                                      Or did I get you wrong again  ;D

                                      We are currently using pfSense as a transparent FW (as a bridge) between OPT1 and WAN...

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • J
                                        Jonb
                                        last edited by

                                        system -> advaced then on that page you will see

                                        Enable filtering bridge
                                        This will cause bridged packets to pass through the packet filter in the same way as routed packets do (by default bridged packets are always passed). If you enable this option, you'll have to add filter rules to selectively permit traffic from bridged interfaces.

                                        They way I read that firewall will only apply if you put a tick in that box which isn't there by default.

                                        Hosted desktops and servers with support without complication.
                                        www.blueskysystems.co.uk

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • C
                                          CryoGenID
                                          last edited by

                                          Ah NOW I think I get you  ;D
                                          I was thinking the other way around all the time  ;)
                                          So what you want to say is if I disable that option (and all packets are simply put through pfSense without
                                          checking) I should try and find out what happens?

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • J
                                            Jonb
                                            last edited by

                                            Yes if you disable the firewall for the bridge. Then you can see what through put you can achive straight through the nic. If it is still bad than you could maybe say it is more of hardware/software with the actual routing/connection side of PFsense.  If it is good then it points to firewall/processor problems.

                                            If anyone of the dev's say I am wrong here please say :)

                                            Hosted desktops and servers with support without complication.
                                            www.blueskysystems.co.uk

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.