From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 4 09:02:50 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9D010656EC for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2010 09:02:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp6.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:3fd3:cd67:fafa:3d78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4A28FC08 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2010 09:02:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seedling.black-earth.co.uk (seedling.black-earth.co.uk [81.187.76.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o8492ZVd082336 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 4 Sep 2010 10:02:42 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Message-ID: <4C820B24.9080200@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 10:02:28 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman Organization: Infracaninophile User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Huff References: <19585.12609.782477.654588@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <19585.12609.782477.654588@jerusalem.litteratus.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: id=60AE908C Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig39B84B2D6DC12CFA6F633232" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.2 at lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_ADSP_ALL, SPF_FAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: Ryan Coleman , FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Which of these NICs will work? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 09:02:50 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig39B84B2D6DC12CFA6F633232 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03/09/2010 18:32:49, Robert Huff wrote: >=20 > Ryan Coleman writes: >=20 >> Any thoughts? I need/want to get a multi-port NIC for my new >> system but I haven't purchased the guts for the server yet.=20 >> =20 >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=3DENE&N=3D10001= 0064+600013872+600016290&QksAutoSuggestion=3D&ShowDeactivatedMark=3DFalse= &Configurator=3D&IsNodeId=3D1&Subcategory=3D27&description=3D&Ntk=3D&CFG=3D= &SpeTabStoreType=3D&srchInDesc=3D=20 >> =20 >> Basically, this machine will have two external (real-world) IPs >> and one network LAN (10.0.1.0/24) address, finding three-NIC >> motherboards is not exactly possible so this is my alternative.=20 >=20 > Intel network cards have a very good reputation; I have been > running a dual-port Pro/1000 GT for years and the thing is still a > rock. Others will have a better opinion on performance issues. > The Intel employee who maintains the driver is frequently seen > on current@ and occasionally on questions@. Nice guy, very > responsive. I second all the other respondents praise of the Intel cards. Intel is a safe choice of NIC -- basically you can be sure that it will not only be supported, but it will work very well. Of the other branded NICs there, unfortunately it is impossible to say much about them based on the manufacturers name. The important thing is the chipset. If the chipset is supported then you can be 99% certain the card will work. (The other 1% are manufacturers who do stupid things to the card firmware.) Unfortunately that is the sort of useful information that vendors almost never tell you on a website. Probably because they think all those letters and numbers will scare people away. They're right of course: that sort of cheap card tends to use chipsets from people like RealTek, many of whose products attract a wholly justified level of opprobrium. [Definitely avoid things that use the rl(4) driver. Stuff that uses re(4) is passable for some uses.] Also "working well" is quite subjective. It depends on the sort of traffic patterns and load levels you need to deal with. Cheaper NICs will not be able to cope with sustained mega-bit levels of traffic and complicated networking layouts, but they will be fine for occasional light use in a desktop box. Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW --------------enig39B84B2D6DC12CFA6F633232 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyCCysACgkQ8Mjk52CukIy20gCeLVm4BU2LO71ynNTG+TLBTdg4 BnQAoJKqFviSONoBEAe6CIcLJLMhHAow =SiPm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig39B84B2D6DC12CFA6F633232--