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: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41D80AD6.3070308>