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

    Small footprint box

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    29 Posts 8 Posters 11.3k 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.
    • H
      hoba
      last edited by

      The via C3/C7 have support for hardware encryption inside the CPU (padlock) but afaik we don't have it enabled currently. The last time we tested it (which was a long time ago) it didn't work, that's why we disabled it.

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

        what about pentium m. is it any good?

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

          The question is always "good for what". You can't say that in general. I don't see any cpu (celeron, pentium-m, c3, c7,…) having problems with the specs that you mention unless you run from something with very low megahertz (like a wrap or a soekris).

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

            :)
            ok, lets put it this way. how far celeron/pentium m with 1gb memory and some intel nics can go as a strictly vpn appliance?
            for example, netgear tells me that ixp425/32mb ram will run 200 tunnels with 60 mbps 3des throughput, or linksys on samsung arm/have_no_idea_how_much_memory device befvp41 will run 50 tunnels with 700kbps.

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

              We have decent test environments thanks to the vendors on our recommended vendors page, but we don't have the huge resources that Netgear has for setting up a test environment to simulate 200 tunnels and 60 Mb throughput, etc.

              My educated guess would be 500 MHz with 256 MB RAM will handle 50-100 IPsec tunnels and your 4/1.5 Mb Internet connection with no problem. Bandwidth would be the primary concern for hardware sizing, and 4/1.5 is so little that pretty much any CPU over 300-400 MHz should be fine, just a matter of having enough RAM for that many tunnels and even 128 MB may be adequate for that.

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

                well… as some girls say "size doesn't matter"  ;D
                even with it's huge resourses netgear can't come up with a decent firmware for it's business-class router and yours is working right out of the box.

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

                  i've found what i was looking for!  :)
                  http://www.portwell.com/products/detail.asp?CUSTCHAR1=NAD-2081
                  but i has marvell nics on board and i can't find them in the list of supported hardware. are they not supported at all?
                  and also is cavium supported by pfsense?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Cry HavokC
                    Cry Havok
                    last edited by

                    It looks like the sk driver has supported that chip since FreeBSD 5.3, so pfSense should be fine.  That said, the official FreeBSD documentation doesn't reflect this, just some CVS logs and mailing list postings…

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

                      i tried to google "marvell 88e8001 pfsense" and all posts there say that it's not working. can't find anything about freebsd.

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

                        dear experts…
                        between these two boxes
                        http://advantech.com/products/Model_Detail.asp?model_id=1-23A32I&BU=NCG&PD=

                        http://portwell.com/products/detail.asp?CUSTCHAR1=NAD-2081

                        which one would you pick...

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

                          I believe that Marvell chipset is the same one Scott has in one of his firewalls at work and hasn't had good luck with. The other box doesn't even list what NIC chipset is used at all, that I see.

                          Given that, my answer would be "neither", unless you can figure out what NIC chipset that other one uses.

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

                            _One 10/100 Intel 82562 FE port for management
                            Gigabit Ethernet Four 10/100/1000 Mbps GbE ports

                            FWA-700 GbE Controller 4 x Marvell 8053_

                            or

                            _FWA-710 4 x Intel 82573

                            LAN Bypass Two segment on GbE ports_

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • dotdashD
                              dotdash
                              last edited by

                              I think your best bet of those would be the FWA-710. Intel GB NICs FTW.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • K
                                kapara
                                last edited by

                                Did you end up buying the FWA-710?  Looks interesting.  Did you get pricing on the unit?  Would be interested to know.

                                Thanks

                                Skype ID:  Marinhd

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

                                  no… couldn't get through to sales rep there so i got myself nad-2081 http://portwell.com/products/detail.asp?CUSTCHAR1=NAD-2081
                                  nice unit. even though cmb was warning me about marvell chips it works fine. all 4 interfaces were recognized right out of the box.

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

                                    covex: Interesting, keep us posted on how that box works out for you.

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

                                      ok… i installed this box in my office. using only 2 ports (lan and wan) out of 4 (sk0 sk1 sk2 sk3) at the moment. first test (transfer 40MB file inside vpn from remote site) gives me 4mbps (turbo dsl). if you wanna see something else, let me know what to run.
                                      for dmesg please see the attachment.

                                      dmesg.txt

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

                                        looks like these marvell chips are not as bad as people saying  :)
                                        even though i found on the net tons of complains about them under *nix and windows mine are working Ok and also i got intel box here running as dc and it has marvell giga chip in there too. so i guess it's not the chip that bad it's just bad implementation of it done by asus and co.

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

                                          new update…  :)
                                          got wistron cm9 installed in the box. works greate! now my gateway/vpn server aslo acting as an ap.
                                          this pfsense is a realy greate pease of software!

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • I
                                            Issacsim
                                            last edited by

                                            Any idea on price?

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