From owner-freebsd-isp Mon May 5 20:13:08 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA10222 for isp-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 20:13:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from veda.is (ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA10216 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 20:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adam@localhost) by veda.is (8.8.5/8.7.3) id DAA01485; Tue, 6 May 1997 03:32:26 GMT From: Adam David Message-Id: <199705060332.DAA01485@veda.is> Subject: Re: ISP Terminal Server Remote Site Requirements In-Reply-To: from Vincent Poy at "May 5, 97 07:33:35 pm" To: vince@mail.MCESTATE.COM (Vincent Poy) Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 03:32:24 +0000 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > In the meantime, I suppose a Linux box just to contain the ports and run > > the driver, forwarding raw TCP/PPP datastreams to a FreeBSD box, might > > just cut it. > > Wouldn't this create a bottleneck though? At 100Mb/s on a dedicated segment... How many ports at what load would saturate it? Dialup traffic is typically still bursty, and you can get full duplex at 100Mb/s. If I'm going to run Linux in a server context, I'd prefer it to be barebones/blackbox in as isolated an environment as possible (i.e. a port engine, nothing more). > I thought FreeBSD did support the Cyclades boards already? Y series, maximum speed 115.2kb/s each port. Z series is a possible future driver. Linux and Windows drivers already exist. > > > So FreeBSD can't do radius as a server yet? > > > > Yes. Trouble is FreeBSD does not have radius support yet in pppd (or ppp?). > > What about for a terminal server such as a Xyglogics or Livingston > that needs radius authetication from a FreeBSD host? Would that work? Of course it would work, but those terminal servers cannot be reused to run FreeBSD later. :) -- Adam David