Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 00:21:05 -0600 From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <mountin.man@mixcom.com> To: "John T. Farmer" <jfarmer@goldsword.com>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, joe@thebestisp.com Subject: Re: Fw: FreeBSD firewall questions Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980213002105.00737ccc@198.137.186.100> In-Reply-To: <199802130318.WAA07752@sabre.goldsword.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:18 PM 2/12/98 -0500, John T. Farmer wrote: > >On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 23:54:22 -0600 "Joe" said: >>IF YOU DO NOT NEED TO CONNECT MORE THAN TWO COMPUTERS DO NOT USE A HUB! (did >>the caps get your 'tension?) the reasons are simple 1 a hub costs money and >>if you were into spending money you wouldn't be using freebsd you'd be >>dealing (and spending a fortune for the same or less effect) with a >>Microsoft or comperable product. And second you can't expect to get better >>that 60%(+-) ie: 6Mbps rather than 10Mbps throughput so you are paying for >>latency and collissions..Just my two cents.. >> > >Where shall I begin? > >1. I don't use FreeBSD because it's cheap, I use it because it > is the best tool for the work I do. I'll add to your response on this bit of flame bait. I'm working with Sun and Irix machines and could care less that they run more commercial apps and are worth a few hundred thousand dollars. Even without any ports added, FBSD has far more to offer and is much easier to tweak for security. Not to mention I don't get dizzy from all the really odd sym-links. How many NT machines are run from command line? From what I hear it can be done. One has to wonder when even MS doesn't run NT for everything, but uses Solaris on Sparcs. Cost had nothing to do with my choice of dropping BSDi for FreeBSD, especially when I was receiving paid for updates for over a year and they collected dust, excepting the one server that wasn't converted for hardware reasons or lack thereof. IMHO, FBSD blows 'em all away for ISP related servers. >2. Hubs are not very expensive. A basic 4 or 8 port hub is less > than $100 (even DataComm Warehouse has a 3com for <$100!!) Paid $80 for my 8 port Netgear (buget part of Bay, FYI) from DataComm. >3. 2 computers wired through a cross-over cable _WILL_NOT_ > achieve any greater throughput than _the_same_two_computers_ > connected through a hub. If you need, we can step through the > math. (But not tonight, I have a headache...) Interestingly a friend had a problem with 2 identical cards using a cross and for some reason support would not help him until he had a hub. He asked and I said they were shoveling s--- his way. >4. In almost every instance that one of my client's have installed > a cross-over cable between two Ethernet devices, they have ended > up replacing it shortly with a hub. Why? If you have two > machines wired together, soon there will be a reason to be > able to connect up the laptop from work, or Junior's PC, or... Nothing like having a cross cable handy for a quick xfer. > For a Firewall/Router type of setup, I still recommend a small > hub. Makes it easier to locate external services (outside web > ftp, etc.) between the outside router and the firewall. Yes they are and since setup counts for much on a switch, it's more secure regardless. Jeff Mountin - Unix Systems TCP/IP networking mountin.man@mixcom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.3.32.19980213002105.00737ccc>