Internet Access Server on 486 -- Best OS ????
Kevin Hunt
386-486 Platform, I am in the process of getting a connection to the
backbone and wonder which OS offers the best user accountability (who
dialed in, how long they where on, what port, etc...) The idea is to
allow a Co-Op of about 25 of us to use the Internet by dial up (our
area is very rural, no local access providers) and if things go well to
offer local access @ affordable prices to the Louisiana, Mississippi and
Arkansas states. Any comments appreciated...
I especially want comments on FreeBSD, Linux, Windows NT, and OS/2
..Kevin
Gary E. Grant
Kevin Hunt <kh...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>I would like comments on different OS's used on Internet Servers on the
>386-486 Platform, I am in the process of getting a connection to the
>backbone and wonder which OS offers the best user accountability (who
>dialed in, how long they where on, what port, etc...) The idea is to
I have several machines & O/S in my lab here. General Comments
FreeBSD2.0 & XFree on a 486/33DX appear "faster" for most user interaction
tasks than Windows NT 3.5 Advanced Server on Pentium- P60... Windows NT
is too sloooow for multiuser operation.
Linux can be used, but its NFS code is very slow... Necessary if you are
going grow into a configuration of more than one machine...
FreeBSD & NetBSD ..seems to be in use on over 100 net access sites on the
internet..
FreeBSD has an ADAPTEC 2940 Driver which is fairly fast .. NetBSD doesnt
support the AHA7770 chipset yet ...
OS/2 :-( an o/s whose time never came ... Dont know anyone other than IBM
using it on the Internet ... AKA Dinosaur ...
Net/Free-BSD is a reasonable stable O/S that has evolved over the last 15
years.. Also in reasonably efficient ...
Other Choices (SCO, UnixWare (From Novell) , Solaris ) One common comment
They are very expensive in a multiuser configuration and you cant get
source without spending LOTS of money ...
Filologist
dumb question. Here goes...
ggr...@crl.com (Gary E. Grant) wrote:
>I have several machines & O/S in my lab here. General Comments
>FreeBSD2.0 & XFree on a 486/33DX appear "faster" for most user
interaction
>tasks than Windows NT 3.5 Advanced Server on Pentium- P60... Windows NT
>is too sloooow for multiuser operation.
>Linux can be used, but its NFS code is very slow... Necessary if you are
>going grow into a configuration of more than one machine...
I'm assuming that NFS means "network file server". Is the NFS code in
FreeBSD that much stronger? Im hoping to run a Un*x BBS some time in the
future with an http server as well. Would it be a better idea to run them
on the same machine, or would it be, as I assumed, better to network
them"? How much traffic could be handled by a single machine running both?
I would probably start out with 6 phone lines as well as 56k connection to
the lucky ISP of my choice.
Just one more question. Why is it that no one ever posts messages about
386bsd? Is there a morbid secret about its performance? Or is it just
unpopular?
Thanks in advance for any help!
Michael L. VanLoon
ggr...@crl.com (Gary E. Grant) wrote:
>Linux can be used, but its NFS code is very slow... Necessary if you are
>going grow into a configuration of more than one machine...
I'm assuming that NFS means "network file server". Is the NFS code in
FreeBSD that much stronger?
Yes, the NFS code in NetBSD and FreeBSD is substantially stronger than
Linux, as is the networking code, overall. While Linux does some
pretty excellent things, networking is not one of its strong points.
Just one more question. Why is it that no one ever posts messages about
386bsd? Is there a morbid secret about its performance? Or is it just
unpopular?
Because it's dead.
NetBSD and FreeBSD are both very mature BSD systems, that long ago
traced their roots to 386BSD.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Michael L. VanLoon mich...@HeadCandy.com
--< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >--
NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac, Amiga, HP300, Sun3, Sun4, PC532,
DEC pmax (MIPS R2k/3k), DEC/AXP (Alpha)
NetBSD ports in progress: VAX and others...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Amancio Hasty Jr
>In article <3j55t7$t...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> filol...@aol.com (Filologist) writes:
>
> Just one more question. Why is it that no one ever posts messages about
> 386bsd? Is there a morbid secret about its performance? Or is it just
> unpopular?
>
>Because it's dead.
>
It got to the point in which Bill Jolitz refused or was not
able to make the next release. I think a lot of things were
going on back there which never surface to the net.
Amancio
--
FREE unix, gcc, tcp/ip, X, open-look, netaudio, tcl/tk, MIME,
midi,sound at freebsd.cdrom.com:/pub/FreeBSD
Amancio Hasty, Consultant
Home: (415) 495-3046
e-mail ha...@netcom.com