From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 28 11:31:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDCB737B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Bsdguru@aol.com) Received: from Bsdguru@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.6.) id n.121.f1f847 (16787) for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:31:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Bsdguru@aol.com Message-ID: <121.f1f847.286cd1f4@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:31:16 EDT Subject: Re: Status of encryption hardware support in FreeBSD To: hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 139 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In a message dated 06/27/2001 11:06:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, soren@soekris.com writes: > That's not really the point here, I was talking about lowest end > hardware compared to high end CPU. If we compare with high end hardware, > then we're talking about factor >50 faster than software.... There are > chips out that can do >1Gbit 3-DES, given a 64bit/66Mhz PCI bus. > > I'm just starting with a low end chip to complement my 133 Mhz 486 based > net4501 board, with the goal of low cost and low power, not absolute > performance. Its cheaper and more flexible to buy a faster motherboard, which is the point to the rest of us who are deciding if we care about a hardware solution. Bryan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message