Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 02 Jan 2005 15:53:10 +0100
From:      Phil Schulz <ph.schulz@gmx.de>
To:        Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Gateway
Message-ID:  <41D80AD6.3070308@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <20050102093214.10d4b2e1.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
References:  <000001c4f09b$f67534d0$68bbbbc0@kewdaeahnhd04i> <20050102093214.10d4b2e1.wmoran@potentialtech.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Bill Moran wrote:
> "Victor Foulk" <VFoulk@KEWD.com> wrote:
[...]
>>What I really had hoped to find, was more of an experienced
>>networking guru's thumb rule equating the number of safeLAN
>>workstations with the required gateway RAM/Processor; to 
>>enable all safeLAN users to experience a minimal network
>>transaction time roughly equivalent to what they would see
>>if plugged directly into a really good hub.
>>Something maybe in the form of:
>>Proc Speed = X*Users+Y
>>RAM = W*Users+Z
>>

I don't think _anybody_ can give such a formula. Especially not whithout 
knowing how much and what kind of traffic your users generate. But as 
others have said already, good NICs are essential.

> 
> As a general rule of thumb, I won't put FreeBSD on anything smaller
> than a 1Ghz with 128M of RAM and 4G of disk space.  While you can
> get away with smaller, that's about the minimum before using the
> box for maintenance purposes becomes a terrible burdon.  Try upgrading
> and rebuilding world on a 266!
> 

You can always build world remotely. 1GHz seems to be overkill for a 
router. Just think of energy consumption.

Regards,

Phil.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41D80AD6.3070308>