Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 19:25:53 +0300 From: Iasen Kostov <tbyte@OTEL.net> To: Pawel Malachowski <pawmal-posting@freebsd.lublin.pl> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PPTP/PPPoE mpd/poptop performance Message-ID: <417E7A91.9080402@OTEL.net> In-Reply-To: <20041026153108.GA91134@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> References: <20041026153108.GA91134@shellma.zin.lublin.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pawel Malachowski wrote: >Hello, > >I would like to ask people using mpd about performance on particular hardware >setups. I am interested in the numbers of sessions (probably PPTP with weak >encryption) and total bandwith, that can be achieved with, e.g.: >. 300MHz CPU, >. 1GHz CPU, >. 2GHz CPU. >Won't PPPoE behave better than PPTP? (My goals are authentication and >performace.) >I guess poptop will be much slower and is not a good solution for bigger >setup (since it works entirely in userland)? >I'm talking about small ISP environment, about 100-200 simultaneous >connections over LAN, about 5-10Mbit/s total bandwith. > > >TIA, > > I'm using poptop + pppoed (both with ppp) with upstream of 100MBit/sec but shapped users (max 2MBit/sec). This all on 2.6 - 3GHz machines and 1GB of RAM each (4.9 and 5.3 machines) . Every of these can handle about 370 users(depending on the max speed of users connected to it). mpd is not good for me becouse it can't (as far as I know) create bundles on the fly - You should have them all in the config files... I think that mpd should be faster choice becouse bigger part of his job is done in the kernel via NG framework. And yes PPPoE (after some test) is faster than PPTP (no encryption at all).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417E7A91.9080402>