So I've recently been looking to remove my fiber-RJ45 converter box, because it requires a seperate poweradapter, and probably also introduces latencty penalty, by guessing.
I've also been using Pfsense with in a hyperv, which was/is a great pleasure to work with, snort etc. you know the rest..
So I've want to upgrade here and there, and use a dedicated NIC in Hyper-V as WAN. Since I want my server behind that Pfsense hyperv. but a fellow member told me about the downtime of my entire WAN if that server goes in maintence mode, which is right. Thought my server would never experience downtime, but that's not realistic, so I don't want that.
So what do people thing/say when I write this.
Wall = Fiber,
Fiber = CCR1009/Edgerouter Pro,
Router = Isolated (SR-IOV) HyperV Chelsio T520-CR (port 1 WAN) = Chelsio port 2 (LAN) = switch, switch = Intel X520 on server side as receiver for the Pfsense wan traffic but from the switch. Both X520 and T520 are in the same server.
I'm in doubt with the router selection, running atm 1gb links, and I want that 2gb nat forwarding experience from my router. And the CCR1009 has a true 10gb sfp+ port, so the internals can forward more from that port, if I were to compare against the edge pro.
Is this stupid networking? Thanks all.
I've also been using Pfsense with in a hyperv, which was/is a great pleasure to work with, snort etc. you know the rest..
So I've want to upgrade here and there, and use a dedicated NIC in Hyper-V as WAN. Since I want my server behind that Pfsense hyperv. but a fellow member told me about the downtime of my entire WAN if that server goes in maintence mode, which is right. Thought my server would never experience downtime, but that's not realistic, so I don't want that.
So what do people thing/say when I write this.
Wall = Fiber,
Fiber = CCR1009/Edgerouter Pro,
Router = Isolated (SR-IOV) HyperV Chelsio T520-CR (port 1 WAN) = Chelsio port 2 (LAN) = switch, switch = Intel X520 on server side as receiver for the Pfsense wan traffic but from the switch. Both X520 and T520 are in the same server.
I'm in doubt with the router selection, running atm 1gb links, and I want that 2gb nat forwarding experience from my router. And the CCR1009 has a true 10gb sfp+ port, so the internals can forward more from that port, if I were to compare against the edge pro.
Is this stupid networking? Thanks all.