From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 15 18:29:38 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEDFC98D for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.indylix.nl (mail.indylix.nl [31.220.44.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FB87B6 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54679B90.40503@indylix.nl> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=indylix.nl; s=o26EqTc7; t=1416076177; bh=K0jyFdIMVFmf6QgeEyovzPqiK0+Qznl7G6vBNjvJhh0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=OnMTYdOumuJv6rvplJsWOd2EmWOdNNhIDANaULR9ha/lfhw9CgdMgHJ/XmejzF7dw 1EQClQa+yI92KYTU1jrn3TC9H5zySzXWMjkCDBJSxzsgS/VpJsDNUp9EDik8H9poOq gVId6dAb329zWAWqjKFWG3Pa3QHnW0cnFJd8+cMKWN+uOkjiCf9GI9aYnvX6quMqWC GZ5CfHK2KETb0HWQg74E+lzmXqYVbsva9e8ft394q9yq3SLJ6iMs3h8uOv+0w1qE6b LXgJOICbOa3EzIrj5Ye7Y0OHaO0gFZkFrFP7w3iBLT0pL4Mo/VIC5KFBPUnGcdjBQu jG+aEyMqrVrJw== Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 19:29:36 +0100 From: Robert Sevat MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darren Pilgrim , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Small/Low Power Server Recommendation? References: <54679447.4070004@qeng-ho.org> <54679693.9060707@indylix.nl> <546797A0.3070602@bluerosetech.com> In-Reply-To: <546797A0.3070602@bluerosetech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:29:38 -0000 On 11/15/2014 07:12 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > On 11/15/2014 10:08 AM, Robert Sevat wrote: >> I have a Freebsd 10.1 mITX server running on an Supermicro X9SBAA-F, I >> use it as router/firewall and have 4 jails running transmission on it. >> It's pushed ~10-11TB of traffic in the past 10 months without cracking a >> sweat. Some of the newer mITX atom boards are really nice looking as >> well. > > Not to rain on the praise, but that's about half a Mbps average. ;) > I'm more interested in peak rate, what you're running as a packet > filter, and, if you're dual-stack, do see any problems with IPv6? > Valid questions :) It's on a 100/100 Mbps connection and all traffic is NAT'ed via PF. Peak traffic will be about ~150 Mbps combined. Part of this is an Rsync connection over ssh hammering the upload towards the main server on 1000/1000 Gbps. Downloading a file at 100 Mbps uses ~10% cpu. So definitely not bad for such a low power device. I am not yet full dual stack, I only just got a /64 on my main server (last week), this is a smaller server at a different ISP, after I got it on my main server I realized I have had dual stack for months on the smaller one as well :p I've tested it a bit so far and got it working, only still need to assign ipv6 address to jails / update dns. Kind Regards, Robert Sevat