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

    ARM Support?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    15 Posts 10 Posters 8.3k 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.
    • ?
      Guest
      last edited by

      https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=108987.msg607358#msg607358

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • A
        Azlan
        last edited by

        @Forsaked:

        I don't know why you think that ARM won't be supported, since the 2.4 test build is already running on a ARM platform?!

        https://twitter.com/gonzopancho/status/735704319874371584

        https://twitter.com/gonzopancho/status/763167234306912256

        http://www.adiengineering.com/products/micro-firewall/

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • J
          jwt Netgate
          last edited by

          @Azlan:

          I would LOVE to buy one of these from SolidRun, but I'd rather run pfSense on it rather than some linux distro.
          See here: https://www.solid-run.com/product/clearfog-base/

          I have heard that the pfSense Team will never port to ARM.
          Is there any way to convince them otherwise?

          Point in-fact I have three of that exact board on order.  So I don't know where you heard that, but it's bullshit, and you definitely didn't hear it from us.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • O
            oppland
            last edited by

            After they made the cubox to cater to openelec and Kodi, I suggested that they sell something that would cater to OpenWRT and this is the result.  I never dreamed it would run pfsense too.  I hope this leads to good things.

            SG-2440

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • F
              FranciscoFranco
              last edited by

              Well I have a SolidRun Hummingboard i4Pro which has "gigabit ethernet" that only manages 320megabit. so I wouldn't get too excited about these.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • DerelictD
                Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                last edited by

                There are plenty of places where sub-gigabit-capable hardware is appropriate. Just as there are plenty of places where paying for gigabit-capable hardware is a complete waste of money. Kind of like building the "ultimate gaming rig" for grandma so she can check her AOL when a NUC (or maybe even a minnowboard turbot) would be perfectly adequate.

                Anything over 100M requires gig-e ports. Just because it has gig-e ports but cannot firewall at gig-e speed does not make it disappointing or defective or undesirable if it is the right tool - at the right price - for the job at-hand.

                Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stan-qazS
                  stan-qaz
                  last edited by

                  The cost difference between a 100 and 1000 port looks to only be a couple bucks, hard to justify the slower port unless there is no chance your device could make any use of speeds over 100M.

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

                    Any updates on this?  :)

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ForsakedF
                      Forsaked
                      last edited by

                      @killerkongfu:

                      Any updates on this?  :)

                      Why should there be an update, while pfSense 2.4 is still in pre-alpha?

                      pfSense: 2.4.3

                      System: QOTOM-Q355G4
                      CPU: Intel Core i5-5250U
                      RAM: 8GB SK Hynix DDR3L-1600
                      LAN: Intel I211-AT
                      SSD: 256GB Lite-On

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • A
                        Azlan
                        last edited by

                        @Forsaked:

                        @killerkongfu:

                        Any updates on this?  :)

                        Why should there be an update, while pfSense 2.4 is still in pre-alpha?

                        Because people are excited about it, myself included.

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

                          @Azlan:

                          @Forsaked:

                          @killerkongfu:

                          Any updates on this?  :)

                          Why should there be an update, while pfSense 2.4 is still in pre-alpha?

                          Because people are excited about it, myself included.

                          Exactly!  I can't wait… as long as they can handle Gig internet I found the perfect solution!  :)

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • J
                            jwt Netgate
                            last edited by

                            @stan-qaz:

                            The cost difference between a 100 and 1000 port looks to only be a couple bucks, hard to justify the slower port unless there is no chance your device could make any use of speeds over 100M.

                            The cost delta between 100M and 1G on the SG-1000 is more than a couple bucks, and the MAC(s) are in the SoC, so they don't factor.  Simple fact: gigE takes more power, and tollerances are tighter.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • M
                              mroubas
                              last edited by

                              @FranciscoFranco:

                              Well I have a SolidRun Hummingboard i4Pro which has "gigabit ethernet" that only manages 320megabit. so I wouldn't get too excited about these.

                              @FranciscoFranco…FYI, the Ethernet issue is a known problem on the processor that the SolidRun's Hummingboard is based on, NXP's i.MX6. Check out ERR004512 in the errata document: http://cache.nxp.com/assets/documents/data/en/errata/IMX6DQCE.pdf

                              It states that there is an internal issue that limits the GigE port to 470Mbps. In the real world limit is closer to 400Mbps and that is heavily optimized, so I would expect less than that in most implementations. I believe this is fixed in subsequent generations of the processor and other families (i.e. i.MX7, i.MX8, QorIQ, LayerScape).

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