From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x233.google.com (mail-oi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6439D21F5B6 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:52:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-f51.google.com with SMTP id e131so5299459oig.38 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:52:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rBPHNLelELF+hCfctsRPL3t/A/Ua1vzmFWAH147Xy0A=; b=ujOa9OMYOBwGBmQ6gZJkNKFL/mBoLUEM+agK0oSuGcDpQRhDbqPbHbOR77MBOo9nbE incX41CpcEi+0VtkZehTHrXlTlwfgfPf/pKxjWVdXXX9LZu8siRqjH4nsxWFW8zBl+3o zwDmKRGzRIe3f5SWSVlKXU0iAvyLgcysIpX2CclCHUVra7WlZbsOFyarrfO9L0v6AMk8 Kt4psLhu+6vgqwMbaN5VeJufxR+ECzDpZFK+fOmvEzm/X+MIP8e++ZKkeqLm66tDvXTR Ccs2H/jPeQgbO5nXqazvKNIf23AM/TIj3iIj3KDjHWCh22VkoqdivtGP8ZBUObbSBsmm zDPw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.101.169 with SMTP id fh9mr6363651obb.0.1418395950145; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:52:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.202.227.77 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:52:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <548A9A66.1040002@iki.fi> References: <548A9A66.1040002@iki.fi> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:52:29 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Erkki Lintunen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] an option for a new platform? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:52:59 -0000 There was a review of that hardware that showed it couldn't push more than 600Mbit natively (without shaping). I felt that the ethernet driver could be improved significantly after looking it over, but didn't care for the 600mbit as a starting point to have to improve from. Not ruling it out, though! It met quite a few requirements we have. On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Erkki Lintunen wrote: > > Hello, > > while enjoying and reading another thread from the list... > >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] how is everyone's uptime? >> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:42:37 -0800 >> From: Dave Taht > [snip] >> But frankly, I would prefer for most of the chaos there to subside and t= o find >> a new, additional platform, to be working on before resuming work, >> that can do inbound shaping at up to 300mbit. And >> to be more openwrt compatible in whatever we do, whatever that is. > > this reminded me that another day I passed a web-page of a platform and > in the hope this has not been on the list yet passing it forward. > > > > An interesting tidbit in the platform is the choice of firmware, I > think. Haven't seen any board yet with the similar choice by the > manufacturer. With a quick summing from the vendor part catalog, the > platform is sub 200 EUR (238 USD in current exchange rate) for an about > working assembly of 3x 1GbE, 4G ram, 1G flash, 802.11a/b/g/n radio... > > I can't say anything how capable the hw might be for the stated inbound > shaping performance. I have had an ALIX board from their previous > generation for years and its been humming nicely though I haven't pushed > it to its envelope. > > Best > Erkki > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks