Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 19:20:27 GMT From: efinley@castlenet.com (Elliot Finley) To: jak@cetlink.net (John Kelly) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Q: which ppp to use? Message-ID: <34b9c963.2588864@castlenet.com> In-Reply-To: <34b9d48c.3198832@mail.cetlink.net> References: <34bd281e.113348308@castlenet.com> <34b8cbd5.968492@mail.cetlink.net> <34b7c3db.1173108@castlenet.com> <34b9d48c.3198832@mail.cetlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:11:28 GMT, you wrote: >On Sat, 10 Jan 1998 18:58:08 GMT, efinley@castlenet.com (Elliot >Finley) wrote: > >>>>If I plan on having up to 200 simultaneous ppp dialins on a single >>>>box, which ppp would be better? pppd or user ppp? >>> >>>Neither one, because that airplane will not fly. >>> >>>32 ports per box, or perhaps 64 with the right stuff, hardware wise. >>>You will need more than one box. >>> >> >>What is the limiting factor? Memory? Cpu power? what? >> >>My box is a Pentium II 233, with 64MB ram.... How much processing >>power and memory does a portmaster have? If I need more memory I'll >>just put more memory in it... So what IS the limiting factor? > >I/O "bandwidth." The PC architecture was not designed for the I/O >bandwidth needed to handle 200 loaded ports. But if you want to see >how high you can go, I would like to hear your report. > Well, if all my ports are hanging off of the PCI Busmastering host, I don't see any problem with I/O Bandwidth... Isn't a 66 MHZ PCI bus capable of something like 33MB/Sec.? That should be plenty... -- Elliot Finley (efinley@castlenet.com) President Hiawatha Coal Company
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34b9c963.2588864>