Intel atom C2350
-
None of those NICs will work with pfSense 2.1 unless you use a newer version of the igb driver (which will then break traffic shaping). My suggestion would be to wait for 2.2 if you want that hardware, or install vSphere on the box and run pfSense as a VM.
We already know that 2.2 works without issue.
The traffic shaping (altq) issue is being worked.
-
Any updates on this?
Does anyone know if there's actually a C2350 board I can buy right now? Looks like it's still AVAILABLE SOON since October 2013. -
Any updates on this?
Does anyone know if there's actually a C2350 board I can buy right now? Looks like it's still AVAILABLE SOON since October 2013.Axiomtek is shipping NA-361 appliance http://www.axiomtek.com/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=1101
With C2358, Atom box can finally reach 900Mbps throughput (CPU @100%). Due to igb driver issue, it'll kernel panic within an hour.
-
Any updates on this?
Does anyone know if there's actually a C2350 board I can buy right now? Looks like it's still AVAILABLE SOON since October 2013.ASROCK has 2350 and 2750 boards
-
Lanner is selling a turn-key box and SuperMicro has Mini-ITX boards but, again, unless you're running vSphere on it you can't use it for pfSense until 2.2. The updated driver in 2.1.1 was pulled for stability issues.
EDIT: … and now the driver is back.
-
Axiomtek is shipping NA-361 appliance http://www.axiomtek.com/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=1101
I was looking for a fanless solution. That board looks like it has a fan, though I'm not sure about this. Also: where the hell can I, as a consumer, not as a reseller, actually buy one of these? I just can't find any online shop that sells them. It looks like US customers will have a chance on buying these kind of appliances before we (Europe) do. I'd appreciate it if someone could recommend a good US based online shop that also ships to Europe.
ASROCK has 2350 and 2750 boards
Can't find any (re-)sellers either.
Only older ATOMs: http://www.asrock.com/mb/index.asp?s=Atom -
Lanner is selling a turn-key box and SuperMicro has Mini-ITX boards but, again, unless you're running vSphere on it you can't use it for pfSense until 2.2. The updated driver in 2.1.1 was pulled for stability issues.
EDIT: … and now the driver is back.
Yes, I believe the driver will be in 2.1.1 (which is not yet released). I "believe" this because I'm making sure it happens (Ermal did the fix.) :)
-
Axiomtek is shipping NA-361 appliance http://www.axiomtek.com/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=1101
I was looking for a fanless solution. That board looks like it has a fan, though I'm not sure about this. Also: where the hell can I, as a consumer, not as a reseller, actually buy one of these? I just can't find any online shop that sells them. It looks like US customers will have a chance on buying these kind of appliances before we (Europe) do. I'd appreciate it if someone could recommend a good US based online shop that also ships to Europe.
ASROCK has 2350 and 2750 boards
Can't find any (re-)sellers either.
Only older ATOMs: http://www.asrock.com/mb/index.asp?s=AtomNetgate ships to Europe. By extension the pfSense Store will also ship to Europe. The C2K series products aren't >quite< here yet, because, unlike your random board shop, we don't ship things until the software works on them.
(I'm just saying.)
-
Any updates on this?
Does anyone know if there's actually a C2350 board I can buy right now? Looks like it's still AVAILABLE SOON since October 2013.Axiomtek is shipping NA-361 appliance http://www.axiomtek.com/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=1101
With C2358, Atom box can finally reach 900Mbps throughput (CPU @100%). Due to igb driver issue, it'll kernel panic within an hour.
We're actually testing somewhat above that, without CPU saturation, or panics. ;)
Here are the results:
-netperf
root@load-src1:/root # netperf -H 10.0.1.2,ipv4 -4TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 () port 0 AF_INET to 10.0.1.2 () port 0 AF_INET : histogram : interval : dirty data : demo
Recv Send Send
Socket Socket Message Elapsed
Size Size Size Time Throughput
bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec
65536 32768 32768 10.01 940.70- iperf
root@load-src1:/root # iperf -c 10.0.1.2 -d -P 10
–----------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
Client connecting to 10.0.1.2, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 56.5 KByte (default)[ 4] local 192.168.1.66 port 37397 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 3] local 192.168.1.66 port 37396 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 7] local 192.168.1.66 port 37400 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 14] local 192.168.1.66 port 37405 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 5] local 192.168.1.66 port 37398 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 6] local 192.168.1.66 port 37399 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 11] local 192.168.1.66 port 37402 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 10] local 192.168.1.66 port 37401 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 13] local 192.168.1.66 port 37404 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001
[ 12] local 192.168.1.66 port 37403 connected with 10.0.1.2 port 5001Waiting for server threads to complete. Interrupt again to force quit.
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 108 MBytes 90.6 Mbits/sec
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 117 MBytes 98.1 Mbits/sec
[ 7] 0.0-10.0 sec 146 MBytes 122 Mbits/sec
[ 14] 0.0-10.0 sec 88.8 MBytes 74.4 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 104 MBytes 87.1 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 0.0-10.1 sec 110 MBytes 91.7 Mbits/sec
[ 11] 0.0-10.1 sec 108 MBytes 89.2 Mbits/sec
[ 10] 0.0-10.0 sec 108 MBytes 90.9 Mbits/sec
[ 13] 0.0-10.0 sec 113 MBytes 94.7 Mbits/sec
[ 12] 0.0-10.0 sec 119 MBytes 99.7 Mbits/sec
[SUM] 0.0-10.1 sec 1.10 GBytes 928 Mbits/sec - iperf
-
Just out of curiosity, did you keep track of cpu utilization during those tests?
-
Whenever I've done similar tests I've just run top in a separate SSH session. That may introduce some additional overhead but I couldn't detect it. If the test is long enough you can just check the cpu usage graphs afterwards.
Edit: Of course since the firewall under test is not sending or receiving the test traffic you can just run top on the console. ::)
These new Atom chips look very promising.
Steve
-
Just out of curiosity, did you keep track of cpu utilization during those tests?
Not really. It wasn't at 100%.
We pushed data at it from the 10G test network today, only unidirectional udp traffic, but that's the tough case.
Still didn't fall over.When the 2.2 snapshots servers are back on-line, we'll test 2.2.