"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@...> posted
200609300330.48229.bss03@..., excerpted below, on Sat, 30 Sep
2006 03:30:44 -0500:
[on Linksys WRT compatible routers]
> I've had good luck running OpenWRT on the older models (v1.1 and v2). The
> newer non-L(inux) models [which can have Linux installed on them by the
> user, after killing VxWorks] have fewer resources, so DD-WRT might be more
> appropriate, but I don't have any experience with that. The newer L(inux)
> models come at a premium and may not be carried everywhere, but OpenWRT is
> a fine choice for them.
If I go that route, I'd either get the Linux model or a compatible unit
from someone else. (I know they exist but don't know specifically which
ones are and are not compatible with the WRT firmwares, at this time, so
if I were buying now, it'd be the Linksys Linux model.)
The one I have, one of the first generation routers, a Netgear rt314 (OEMed
zyxel p314), that cost me $200 when I bought it years ago. It has been
old faithful and would likely continue to be old faithful for many more
years, and that was the going price at the time so I've certainly
gotten my money's worth, no complaints there, but it's just getting to be
too slow -- only 10Mbit Ethernet WAN side, tho 100Mbit LAN side.
Anyway, given the $200 I paid for the old one, even the premium $80-ish
I'd pay for a Linux version Linksys now doesn't seem unreasonable, given
the increased flexibility I'd have with it.
> If the load on the LAN will be large, be aware that the WRT hw does have
> some issues under heavy load, particularly when the number of TCP
> connections being created is high which happens with some P2P clients.
It wouldn't be that large, really. It's for personal use, and I tend to
put all my money/time/energy into a single machine at once, so I don't
tend to have a lot of LAN traffic. However, I /am/ learning skills and
techniques I might end up putting to use elsewhere at some point, and even
if not, it's better than even money that I'd end up replying to someone on
a newsgroup or the like that /was/ using it for something more major --
that always seems to be happening <g>, so I try to keep information
appropriate to those possibilities filed away in my head. <g> Thus,
regardless of my personal use, it's useful info. Thanks.
>> (if it's not, it'll be a full computer running a conventional x86 or
>> x86_64/amd64 based Linux kernel), bought with the intent of upgrading it
>> to one of the several open source firmware alternatives available.
> If you need GigE speeds for the LAN, be sure to find a main board with
> good buses. No PC NICs that I know of support HW level routing at any
> layer, so every packet that is routed has to cross your bus twice, once
> going to memory and once going back to that (or another) NIC. The
> standard PCI bus (not PCI-X or PCI-e) can only support 4 Gbps in the best
> of conditions, which means only about 2 GigE clients.
As I said, not likely stuff I personally need to worry about, but useful
information even so. For me, most traffic will be across the LAN/WAN
barrier, not LAN side, and 100Mbit Fast Ethernet should be plenty for
several more years anyway, WAN side. As I said, my current router is
10Mbit Ethernet WAN side, but Cox just upped the cap to 7Mbit down from 6,
here, and the premium service /was/ 9Mbit -- it might be 10 now tho I
haven't checked. I know my router was/is handling 6Mbit across the
WAN/LAN barrier just fine, but either the 7Mbit hasn't yet taken effect or
6Mbit is top of the line for this router. I know it's getting close as
7-8Mbit is pretty close to top thruput on 10Mbit Ethernet in any case,
even when it's /not/ across a LAN/WAN router barrier. Thus, even if I get
lucky and it'll actually do 7Mbit, I don't expect it'll take the next
jump, so it's time to upgrade. However, given I was on 608kbit DSL when I
got this router, and it has taken me thru 6Mbit anyway, over five plus
years, far more than the Linksys (for example) of the same generation did,
I figure I've gotten my money's worth and if I do 100Mbit and five-ish
years from now have to upgrade as it goes past 70Mbit, I've nothing to
complain about there either. =8^) So no, gigabit isn't something I'm
even worried about at this point, tho obviously it'd be nice for
flexibility if I can get it.
Anyway, some of the boards now come with two or more separate PCI buses.
I know my current Tyan dual Opteron comes with three plus the AGP, two
slots each on two dual PCI-X, off the AMD north-side PCI-X chip (8131), and
an old 5v compatibility PCI off the south-bridge (8111). While I'd not be
getting anything /that/ high end for my router, presumably someone wanting
to run four or five gig-E interfaces off the same mobo/cpu /would/ need
something with that sort of PCI layout, and since I have it on my main
machine mobo, it's certainly available.
The thing I'm debating now, is if I choose to go full computer anyway, why
not go lowest end amd64 I can buy, and run Gentoo on it the same as on my
main system, in which case I can share at least /some/ packages, the ones
without desktop specific USE flags that I want on both systems, anyway.
In theory, I could even run a distcc client on it to help with compiling,
altho my coming upgrade to dual dual-core Opterons (285s, most likely)
would mean I'd not get /that/ much benefit out of it, and it'd break the
rule of not putting stuff like gcc on a firewall purposed system. I
figure low end bare-bones, with a smallish <100GB hard drive set hardware
write-only mode after installation) and using an extra half-gig RAM stick I
already have, would run ~$300-ish.
So... anybody have any opinions on this? Should I go straight 32-bit or
64-bit Gentoo? If I went 32-bit, I'd probably go with a pre-built router
distribution instead of bothering with trying to keep up with Gentoo on
it, altho I might change my mind on that after I get the dual Opteron 285s
in my main system. Anybody else running such things, either Gentoo or
other Linux or BSD? Why did you choose what you did?
See, this thread /did/ come back around to amd64! <g>
>> Likewise, my next mp3 player, which
>> will be my first hard drive based unit, will be purchased with the
>> intent of upgrading it to rockbox or a similar alternative, as well as
>> upgrading the hard drive to a 120 gig or so model.
> While the HD isn't upgradable, the iRiver H10 line will run Rockbox.
> IIRC, the older H300 models do as well. I've be very happy with my
> iFP-799, although I do use a hacked firmware, which improves the range
> of Vorbis bitrates the player supports. (The native vorbis support of
> the iFP line was the main reason I purchased from iRiver.) IIRC,
> Rockbox is also being ported to the iFP line, but that port is not
> complete. Once I feel installing RockBox is safe, I'll probably upgrade
> my iFP to it.
I've been looking at the H10 line, and I /think/ some of them might
actually be HD upgradable, now. They are running 1.8" hard drives, which
at present top out at 60 gig, but new ones have been announced, and 120
gig shouldn't be far away.
Do you know for sure that the current 20 gig (or maybe 30 gig) aren't hard
Anyway, I figure it'll be 1H2007 before the 120 gig 1.8" drives are
decently available, so I had some time to wait, for both that and rockbox
H10 support to develop further.
The other thing I was figuring was that iPods will probably be announced
with 120 gig 1.8" drives shortly after they become available as well.
While rockbox iPod support for that generation would lag a bit, it's a
fair bet they'd come out with it. It's also a fair bet I could buy a
smaller capacity one that already has rockbox support and upgrade the
drive. However, again, we're looking at probably first half next year
before the drives are widely available, and in any case I expect I'll be
doing the dual Opteron 285 upgrades first, later this year, and will be
waiting several months after that before getting serious on the mp3 player
front, which would again take me to March or later of next year, so it
looks like everything will come together nicely at about the same time. <g>
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list