From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 16 21:30:14 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D39BA16A4CF for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:30:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from bigass1.bitblock.com (ns1.bitblock.com [66.199.170.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3700343D53 for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:30:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mitch@bitblock.com) Received: from dc1 ([66.199.170.122]) (AUTH: LOGIN mitch@bitblock.com) by bigass1.bitblock.com with esmtp; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:30:08 +0000 X-Abuse-Reports: Visit http://www.bitblock.com/abuse.php X-Abuse-Reports: and submit a copy of the message headers X-Abuse-Reports: or review our policies and procedures X-Abuse-Reports: ID= 41C1FE60.000083CF.bigass1.bitblock.com,dns; dc1 ([66.199.170.122]),AUTH: LOGIN mitch@bitblock.com From: "Mitch (Bitblock)" To: "'Mike Jakubik'" Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:30:08 -0800 Organization: Bitblock Systems Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 In-Reply-To: <45876.207.219.213.163.1103231998.squirrel@207.219.213.163> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.181 Thread-Index: AcTjtTKOdN+aM6JfT3meEuC++S2C9gAAMlqA Message-ID: cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: 'Elton Machado' Subject: RE: Load Balancing X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:30:14 -0000 > > Why dont you all do yourselves a favor and go out and buy one of those > home dsl/cable modems that have 2 ports and provide load balancing > instead. > [Mitch says:] The only ones I've seen were rather expensive and aren't modem's - they are routers... so you have to still have your ADSL modem, your cable modem, your load balancing router, which generally does a poor job, and has all kinds of limitations... Why spend $500 bucks on a load shared with an inadequate non-open source firewall that doesn't do what I want and then have to add a firewall anyways ;-) And worse, it works in NAT mode, and probably screws up ipsec, and traffic shaping too... Is that enough reasons to try building a better mousetrap? m/