Pfsense Router Server

[Anakumulos]

I am looking to repurpose a few old computers that I have lying around at home, and was wondering which setup would work best.

 

The first machine is an old Emachines T3990 (I have 2 sitting around):

Parts Pulled From	Emachines T3990 Desktop (2005)
CPU	Celeron D 335 / 1 Core / 2.8 GHZ / 256KB L2 Cache / 32 Bit / Socket 478
Motherboard	Emachines mATX Motherboard / Intel 865GV Chipset
Graphics	Intel Extreme Graphics 2
RAM	DDR RAM / 2GB Max / DIMM 184-pin / Single Channel
Storage	2 SATA - 2 IDE Ports
Audio	AC 97 Audio
Expansion	3x PCI Slots (32-bit)
LAN Ports	1 10/100 (Rear I/O)

The second is an Acer Aspire T160:

Parts Pulled From	Acer Aspire T160
CPU	Sempron 3200+ / Single Core / 1.8GHZ / 256KB L2 Cache / 64 Bit / Socket 939
Motherboard	Acer Motherboard / Nvidia nForce4 Chipset
Graphics	-
RAM	DDR RAM / 4GB (MAX) / DIMM 184-pin / 400 MHZ / PC3200 / Dual Channel
Storage	4 SATA / 2 IDE
Audio	AC 97
Expansion	3 PCI (32-bit) / 1 PCIe x16
LAN Ports	1 RJ45 10/100 Rear I/O

 

Between these two choices, what would be best? or, should I simply spend ~150 on ebay and newegg to get Server-Grade components, chassis, and power supply?

[KirbyTech]

You will want to buy something different than what you have listed.

[Unhelpful]

Just now, Anakumulos said:

Between these two choices, what would be best? or, should I simply spend ~150 on ebay and newegg to get Server-Grade components, chassis, and power supply?

If you're willing to spend $150 on a router.... Why go pfsense? Just for the hell of it?

[Unhelpful]

I'll quote myself from other posts. 

 

On 2/12/2016 at 0:47 PM, JoeyDM said:

I completely agree with just doing it to do it, but pfsense is shitty for several reasons. You have to buy NICs to make it usable, and you don't have the passive cooling that a router has since it is in a PC, so it's louder by default. The wireless support is horse shit.

 

I really just recommend buying a consumer router, or if you want to learn some stuff buy a used Cisco router on ebay to practice cisco code, and slap an AP onto it.

On 2/12/2016 at 0:42 PM, JoeyDM said:

I can respect doing it because you can, it's a fun way to learn... But pfsense has shit support for wireless. It has gotten better in the last 2 years, but it's still shit for wireless support.

[Anakumulos]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

If you're willing to spend $150 on a router.... Why go pfsense? Just for the hell of it?

The reason why is because I intend to use things like Squid as a web cache, and also because I fully intend to run several servers in my house, and pfsense has the functionality to do what i need, where most consumer routers don't (And I cant stand Cisco routers. Ive had too many fail on me)

[Unhelpful]

Just now, Anakumulos said:

The reason why is because I intend to use things like Squid as a web cache, and also because I fully intend to run several servers in my house, and pfsense has the functionality to do what i need, where most consumer routers don't (And I cant stand Cisco routers. Ive had too many fail on me)

You've... Had Cisco routers fail on you? Are you serious? What shitty, shady, used routers did you buy?!

[beavo451]

6 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

I'll quote myself from other posts. 

 

 

 

 

You cite crappy WiFi support, but yet you advocate getting a Cisco router with no WiFi support? I understand your Cisco reasoning, but it is ironic.

 

Practice Cisco code? For somebody that never intends on using Cisco stuff on a professional level, I'd rather use open source software.

[beavo451]

You will not want either of those machines. If you have to, whichever one is the quietest and has the least power consumption.

[MrBucket101]

11 minutes ago, Anakumulos said:

The reason why is because I intend to use things like Squid as a web cache, and also because I fully intend to run several servers in my house, and pfsense has the functionality to do what i need, where most consumer routers don't (And I cant stand Cisco routers. Ive had too many fail on me)

If that is what you want, get a mikrotik. They're essentially min-pfsense boxes. HIGHLY configurable. I've got one, and liked it so much I ended up buying them for all of my family. I setup a device->device VPN network so we're all on the same network with no configuration needed. Just use the router and you're on the VPN.

I've also got queue trees and packet scheduling setup, and I even went so far as to write and schedule my own scripts to dynamically allocate traffic based on traffic detected a specific machine.

 

EDIT:

 

here's what I have: http://routerboard.com/RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN

 

10 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

You've... Had Cisco routers fail on you? Are you serious? What shitty, shady, used routers did you buy?!

He's probably referring to their consumer line

[Unhelpful]

34 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

You cite crappy WiFi support, but yet you advocate getting a Cisco router with no WiFi support? I understand your Cisco reasoning, but it is ironic.

 

Practice Cisco code? For somebody that never intends on using Cisco stuff on a professional level, I'd rather use open source software.

Remember that not all of that was directed towards you  that was a quote from an old topic. How do Cisco routers have no wifi support? Just have to pick the right one, or get a switch.

 

I'm not even talking about Cisco. Pfsense isn't a great idea for plenty of reasons, the primary being the noise from a computer, rather than the passive cooling from a router.

 

On the topic of Cisco though, you could get something like a used 881. I don't necessary recommend it though. 

[Anakumulos]

I intend to use this as a gateway only. No wireless would be required with the machine, and I would make a few very minor updates (CPU cooler, chassis, and other small things). Im expecting to rackmount the machine with my other servers I have, and was simply wondering which one would be best for a temporary setup until I retire another family member's PC that has dual gigabit, since I dont want to funnel a huge amount of money for a new router that can actually do what i need.

[Mikensan]

The Acer is 64bit, lot of the packages from pfsense only work with 64bit. pFsense works just fine on realtek NICs, but advocate intel because realtek are generally junk. For the price of a wifi card you can just buy a cheap wifi access point and plug it into a NIC.. why bother with built-in wifi cards.

 

If you just want a pure internet > firewall > LAN, your acer will be fine assuming your internet speeds are less than 100mbps. If you want to however put a firewall between LAN segments, that acer will not be able to handle a gigabit network.

 

You already have the hardware, don't let anyone talk you out of it and just set it up and get going to see if you want to invest any further. With no packages or honestly even a few - 2gb will do you just fine. 

 

I do think both are a little underpowered to do squid. It'll work but it will greatly impact your speeds.

 

@JoeyDM I've had some 2950s and 3550s "go bad" on me. Usually it's the flash memory that goes bad and cisco has replaced them. I've worked with hundreds of cisco switches and I've seen them survive environments well beyond their spec, they're good switches but anything can go bad.

[Unhelpful]

Just now, Mikensan said:

 

@JoeyDM I've had some 2950s and 3550s "go bad" on me. Usually it's the flash memory that goes bad and cisco has replaced them. I've worked with hundreds of cisco switches and I've seen them survive environments well beyond their spec, they're good switches but anything can go bad.

Yeah I was just saying it isn't common. I'll never claim it's impossible. Just uncommon.

[Anakumulos]

@Mikensan Thanks for the info! I only intend for it to be a gateway only, and I have a few HP Procurve switches that Im using for intranet activity with trunking and such. Its just a temporary setup to get limited file sharing access for when Im on campus and I need a resource for my work.