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

    New user, new setup question about Quad NIC in VM

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    10 Posts 4 Posters 2.9k 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.
    • S
      sos
      last edited by

      Hi All - new pfSense user here.

      I'm looking to upgrade our home network setup, which is currently an ADSL2 connection through a vigor 100 modem to an ASUS RT-ac68 (which will be re-purposed as a wired switch /wifi AP).

      Am planning to upgrade to 100/20 fibre connection later this year, and with half a dozen connected devices and running a "road-warrior" openVPN setup, I've decided to route/firewall all of this through pfsense.

      I've currently got pfsense running in VirtualBox under an Arch linux host (i5-750 CPU, 8GB RAM) and have an Intel i350-T4 quad NIC coming from ebay (Chinese knock off with MR-Macom chips). PfSense looks great so far!

      Question:
      With the intel quad NIC, I don't think I need a switch - but how do I set up the adapters in pfSense/VB so that:

      NIC1 - WAN
      NIC2 - Home LAN port1 -> wifi APupstairs
      NIC3 - Home LAN port2 -> wifi AP downstairs
      NIC4 - Home LAN port3 -> VOIP box

      Is this possible, or am I better off just using two pf the ports (WAN and LAN), and running the pfSense LAN into a switch?

      I've got my eye on the pfSense hardware (SG-2440), and may well go there in due course, but for now I need to run the Arch box anyway, as it's serving files/backend TV server, so it's already powered on.

      Thanks in advance from a pfSense n00b!

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

        have an Intel i350-T4 quad NIC coming from ebay (Chinese knock off with MR-Macom chips).

        hopefully it works, theres lots of knockoff intel crap that doesn't.

        With the intel quad NIC, I don't think I need a switch - but how do I set up the adapters in pfSense/VB so that:

        if you don't mind horrible lan performance, then no, you don't need a switch. PC's are not good switches.

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

          As someone said to me, a 5 port switch is about $15.. you're better off using one than not.

          You'll likely get better performance in a T1 Hypervisor (esxi, xen, kvm or hyper-v to name a few), is there any reason you're not using one?

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

            Thanks guys. I've ordered an 8-port managed switch (Netgear GS108-T), and will therefore likely just be using 2 of the NIC ports on the i350.

            I'll look into the Hypervisor options under Arch Linux (kvm, qemu, xen) but to be honest, for my piddly network, there is lots of headroom with the current Virtualbox setup  :)

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

              @sos:

              Thanks guys. I've ordered an 8-port managed switch (Netgear GS108-T), and will therefore likely just be using 2 of the NIC ports on the i350.

              I'll look into the Hypervisor options under Arch Linux (kvm, qemu, xen) but to be honest, for my piddly network, there is lots of headroom with the current Virtualbox setup  :)

              Good choice getting a switch.

              A T1 hypervisor will give you better power consumption, which, if you're using PFsense 24/7, should be a consideration :)

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

                @heper:

                have an Intel i350-T4 quad NIC coming from ebay (Chinese knock off with MR-Macom chips).

                hopefully it works, theres lots of knockoff intel crap that doesn't.

                With the intel quad NIC, I don't think I need a switch - but how do I set up the adapters in pfSense/VB so that:

                if you don't mind horrible lan performance, then no, you don't need a switch. PC's are not good switches.

                Perhaps I got lucky, or the Chinese guys are making better copies, but the quad port i350-T4 that just arrived via Hong Kong ($60 on the bay) has "intel" printed on the circuit board where the OEM Dell cards do, and the two chips near the ports are labelled "LFE9219C-R DELTA 1422", rather than MR-MACOM". Haven't benched it yet tho :)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  matrix200
                  last edited by

                  Any chance you could provide the ebay link where you bought it?
                  I am thinking of replacing my two dual port realtek 8111 cards with a one quad port one like that.
                  Provided of course it works reliably :)

                  Current network "hardware" :
                  Running 2.2RC in Virtualbox 4.2.16.

                  Retired:
                  ALIX2C2 , 4 gigabyte disk cf card running 2.0 (official release).

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

                    @matrix200:

                    Any chance you could provide the ebay link where you bought it?
                    I am thinking of replacing my two dual port realtek 8111 cards with a one quad port one like that.
                    Provided of course it works reliably :)

                    Sorry for not replying sooner - here's the one I bought, from alex_xu10:
                    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-Intel-I350-T4-PCI-Express-PCI-E-Four-RJ45-Gigabit-Ports-Server-Adapter-NIC-/251671290126?hash=item3a98c7210e

                    It's still working great and appears / seems to function like the real deal (not that I've tested it forensically, mind).

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M
                      matrix200
                      last edited by

                      Thanks, I already bought it from some guy who agreed to put sell me a card with delta chips (as opposed to mr makom).
                      Frankly, haven't had the time to install it yet.
                      In your opinion would it consume less power then two dual port gigabit realteks or more?
                      My box is relatively small (silverstone ml-05b) and ventilation is scant (just noctua low profile cpu cooler with 92mm fan and one side 80mm slow spinning fan).
                      Since the card comes with a heatsink I would guess it consumes somewhat more power then my current two cards who have no heatsink whatsoever?

                      Current network "hardware" :
                      Running 2.2RC in Virtualbox 4.2.16.

                      Retired:
                      ALIX2C2 , 4 gigabyte disk cf card running 2.0 (official release).

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

                        @matrix200:

                        Thanks, I already bought it from some guy who agreed to put sell me a card with delta chips (as opposed to mr makom).
                        Frankly, haven't had the time to install it yet.
                        In your opinion would it consume less power then two dual port gigabit realteks or more?
                        Since the card comes with a heatsink I would guess it consumes somewhat more power then my current two cards who have no heatsink whatsoever?

                        The i350-t4 is specced at 5W consumption, you'd be hard pressed to get much better than that from a network card.

                        Realistically the absolute best you can get is about 0.5W per port, but that is kind of unrealistic as it assumes no losses.

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