weEvil Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 I'm looking to build a small server. I am also wanting to replace my router, old and it heats up alot.I figure, it would be nice to get an al-in-one. A server/router/internet gateway box Both wired and wireless.Is this possible? Basically a PC with a bunch of wireless & wired network cards that will serve my network. It would be great since I'd also like a dedicated firewall PC while I'm at it.I'm thinking microATX with a VIA processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zxian Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 You can do exactly that, but I'd suggest the mITX boards from Intel instead of VIA. They're MUCH cheaper, and do the trick quite nicely. Intel is releasing a new version of it's D201GLY board in a few months. Initial reports have suggested that a system built around that board/CPU would draw no more than 30W at load. You could add a PCI network card and make your own router/gateway box very easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted October 9, 2007 Author Share Posted October 9, 2007 (edited) You can do exactly that, but I'd suggest the mITX boards from Intel instead of VIA. They're MUCH cheaper, and do the trick quite nicely. Intel is releasing a new version of it's D201GLY board in a few months. Initial reports have suggested that a system built around that board/CPU would draw no more than 30W at load. You could add a PCI network card and make your own router/gateway box very easily. That's a minor issue. I just need to know how to do it. What software I need. What type of hardware.Specific brands & pieces a bit later.About the wireless: how many cards do I need? I would like to support maximum 4 wireless connections. Let's say I need 6 though, how many cards can I use at once to get full speed (at least 50mb/s per connection) out of them? Or hell, maybe powerline networking. If you have an outlet, you have an ethernet connection. Wireless powerline hub available too by NetGear's claims.Also, I want wireless & wired in my box too. And a hard-drive & an OS running all the time serving the network & maintaining the gateway. Gateway firewall too. As well as basic server too. Being a 'public' access point for my network. Edited October 9, 2007 by brucevangeorge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmaugyGrrr Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 (edited) Soekris boxes. Small, "cheap"ish, power-efficient, expandable (edit: err ok, not that expandable), use either CF or (better) a microdrive.Recent models such as the net5501 look very nice.I use an old Via Epia 5000 (equivalent to 200MHz) with 256MB memory and XP Pro as a "server" - it works fine. Fanless, noiseless except for the HD.http://www.soekris.com/how_to_buy.htmI do have a Soekris net5421, but I haven't really put it to use - installing Debian is a non-trivial task.Another option is Lex mini PCs. I have an old 533MHz 3-NIC Lex Light, but the 2.5" HD gets very hot during summer months, so I don't use it any more. I haven't looked for canadian vendors - I only know of LinITX in the UK.If you need low-power and don't need wireless and only one NIC, a tiny, an unslung Linksys NSLU2 might work well for basic services. http://www.nslu2-linux.org/If you want a dedicated firewall, get a 3-NIC WRAP 1E-2 (now discontinued) or similar, and put pfSense on it. Edited October 9, 2007 by SmaugyGrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zxian Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 As for hardware - a single ethernet card and a single wireless card with a high gain antenna should do the trick. You'd only need one of each, and then tie the ethernet card into a simple switch.Internet->onboard ethernet->system->PCI ethernet->switch->networkreplace the PCI ethernet and switch by the wireless card, and you've got the same kind of configuration, but wireless.As for wireless speed - you're never going to get 50mbps on 802.11g cards - even with a dedicated wireless router. Your actual throughput will be about 24-25mbps on a good day, but that's overall wireless throughput. If you need speed, there's no better way than with a cable. What you gain in portability, you lose in speed - it's as simple as that.For a basic gateway/firewall configuration, you might want to look at ClarkConnect. It's a linux distro aimed at doing just that with minimal technical knowledge (although, if you have technical knowledge, you can make it that much more powerful).The only thing I'm unsure about is whether or not the Intel board supports shared IRQ addresses - there's only one PCI slot on the board AFAIK, so getting two cards to work might be tricky. You could skip the internal wireless card and get a dedicated WAP instead.So... total parts list:Intel D201GLY2 motherboard/CPU1GB PC2-5300 RAM2.5" 80GB hard drive (Seagate momentus will do fine)PCI ethernet card - I prefer Intel cards, but any should do.mITX case - you can find many to chose from here. Make sure you chose one with a built in PSU - you'll probably want about 60W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 Zxian, nice setup indeed! With the software of Clarkconnect it could be a cheap solution indeed, so I second the list you made. But, the downside is that it’s based on a SiS chipset and a Celeron 220 (1.2 GHz) and doesn’t have so much expandability (lack of PCI-E/PCI slots and SATA). If you like to use it as a fileserver as well and you like to have split networks or anything like that, I would go for something else.A Celeron 4x0 with an Intel 965G based motherboard in a uATX housing would not draw that much more power then a Celeron 2x0 and SiS 662 chipset; All depends on the PSU by the way .I have been looking for low power consumption PCs for some time now and see that iNTEL is the only way to go for now, even the Pentium E21x0 series draw way less then the BE Athlon series from AMD, and that’s under full load or OS load. You would be surprised if I say that a Celeron consumes almost the same as a Core2 E2xxx/E4xxx based system, differences will be not more then 5Watts max.!By the way, Clarkconnect doesn’t make use of multicore CPUs… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zxian Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 A Celeron 4x0 with an Intel 965G based motherboard in a uATX housing would not draw that much more power then a Celeron 2x0 and SiS 662 chipset; All depends on the PSU by the way .Not quite so...At IDF this week, Intel showed a newer model called the D201GLY2 with an extra 2 SATA ports in addition to the existing PATA IDE port and it comes with a new Intel “Celeron” Model 220 1.2 GHz processor that can be cooled completely passively. That would seem to indicate that the new processor is probably in the 10W to 15W TDP range if it can be cooled without an active fan on top of the CPU. Pricing is expected to be similar to the slightly older D201GLY and should be available soon.-SourceI highly doubt that you'd be able to make a Celeron 400 series based system drop as low as 30W on idle. The motherboard alone would draw at least 20W.The lack of expandability isn't too big of a problem, since this is a basic web server and gateway, lots of storage isn't needed. A basic 2.5" hard drive will do just fine.Also, there are people who have been able to use dual-CPU configurations for ClarkConnect (just check the forums). I'm sure that you'd be able to run it on dual-core CPUs as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 I highly doubt that you'd be able to make a Celeron 400 series based system drop as low as 30W on idle. The motherboard alone would draw at least 20W...... Also, there are people who have been able to use dual-CPU configurations for ClarkConnect (just check the forums). I'm sure that you'd be able to run it on dual-core CPUs as well.No, a Celeron 4xx system will not drop under 30W idle, but neither does a Celeron 2xx system when based on a normal chipset like the SiS 662. My guess will be that idle the 4xx system will do 5W more and under load 15W to 20W. TDP of the Celeron 220 has a TDP of 19W by the way, that’s 16W less then the 4xx...Thank you to check there forums by the way, this is interesting news for me .--- EDIT ---After some research I found these numbers. I combined information from different sites and this is what came out:iNTEL Celeron 42033 watts idle36 watts loadiNTEL Pentium E214028 watts idle48 watts loadThese numbers include a 965G chipset (10.8W) based mobo, but no hard disk and no optical drive and you have to keep in mind the efficiency of the PSU. These numbers indicate the power drawn after the PSU so not from the power outlet on the wall.What beats me is that iNTEL gives the Pentium E2140 a 65W TDP while it uses way less then an AMD BE series CPU with a 45W TDP. Even AMD´s new single cored LE CPU has a 45W TDP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 Awesome!Now what do you guys think of powerline ethernet?http://www.netgear.com/Products/PowerlineN...Home+NetworkingNetgear also offers WAP thru powerline networking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted October 14, 2007 Author Share Posted October 14, 2007 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 Why are you bumping your topic? If it’s about the power line Ethernet, then post in the Network section please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now