FreeBSD Based Gaming Router 240
Zaphoid writes "Lan Game Reviews has posted an article on how to use an old computer and FreeBSD distro m0n0wall to create a gaming router. Gaming routers allow users to use their full bandwidth for downloads and other high bandwidth apps, and low latency applications at the same time. By keeping packet queues on the router side, rather than the modem side. Users are able to achive great pings in online games, while fully using their download bandwidth. This is a great alternitive to expensive gaming routers on the market today."
Unlikely use of time and effort, better solutions. (Score:5, Insightful)
Gamers aren't likely to spend time they could be gaming with installing, configuring and maintaining a router setup. It's far more sensible, in today's age of commodity broadband routers, to pick up a Linksys WRT54G or similar from a local supplier and use that instead, a simple and out-of-the box solution that should require fairly little maintainance after installation and won't require an entire machine sitting humming away in the corner just to route packets. The WRT54G specifically makes a great case for this, because it can be flashed with different open source firmware to improve its flexibility and stability.
In other situations, the dedicated machine would probably have a numerous array of other uses, making it a more useful overall package, but since this article focuses on gaming the box running FreeBSD is unlikely to be able to be used for gameplay, so its pretty much relegated to packet routing and other miscellaneous duties. That, to me, seems like a complete waste in this instance
Re:Gaming routers look pretty small, quiet and che (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to mention power consumption is certainly worse.
No content article, why posted? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why was this posted now, instead of in a few weeks when there's some actual content?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
More to the point, and actually seriously... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's important, because although FreeBSD does have SOME of ALTQ, and SOME of KAME, it does not have the most recent code and (certainly in the case of KAME) not even all of the older code.
Some people mentioned crashes with sessions, in other posts. I couldn't prove these were due to things like ALTQ or KAME, but it is entirely plausible that it is due to something of that sort. The *BSD folk have some of the most complete, not to mention some of the most powerful, networking code out there. The problems arise when it remains out there and doesn't get merged in.
(Linux isn't much better. USAGI - an alternative IPv6 stack - is not included. SGI's STP was never really looked at. GAMMA - an excellent network layer for clusters, a common use for Linux, is barely known outside of a cult following. Same for ABISS. Web100 - a neat instrumentation layer for Linux' network code - also hasn't gone very far.)
In this day and age, there is really no excuse for poor networking code. The patches exist. The validators and instrumentation exist. The extensions and refinements all exist.
I'm one of the first to take issue with Windows folks who don't patch their systems - whether for security or for capability - and damnit, I'm not going to be any slower just because I happen to like both Linux and the *BSDs. If anything, I'm going to be faster on the draw, precisely because I do care and want these systems to really show what they're capable of.
Why do you think I ran the FOLK project for the 2.4 kernels? Because I like pain? No, it's because of the sheer volume of unknown and neglected code that could make a huge difference. The FOLK patch was getting close to the size of the kernel itself! And that was just extensions, I had very few of the maintenance patches included - some of the -ac stuff, but almost nothing from the -aa series.
If there was a chance in hell of being paid for it, I'd be happy to invest the time and effort to get either the Linux or the *BSD network code absolutely right. Someone needs to.
Please stop posting about gaming routers!! (Score:3, Insightful)
They did their benchmarks using various p2p apps and games. They'd launch the games when the p2p apps were maxing the bandwidth.
Basically the benchmarks went like this for all of them:
Without 'super duper bandwidth adjuster thingie' average game ping 600
With super thingie: 450
So they all went from totally unplayable to totally unplayable.
I want to set up a box for gaming and voip, a linux box can be dedicated for this but I've read it's tricky to get it all working. But in the end it actually works unlike every gaming router I've read about.
If your personal experience is different, please post, but I've read the reviews for about 6 of em, and none of them were up to the job. Sure they knocked off 100 milliseconds, but not near enough to make it actually worth it to get a gaming router.
Re:Easier... (Score:1, Insightful)
Sveasoft (James Ewing) has repeatedly demonstrated through action that he does not intend to abide by the Open Source licenses of the software he combines. He uses some unpublished build tools even though the GPL requires him to provide all tools necessary to recreate the binaries. Some of the published build tools are themselves programs under the GPL, but he fails to provide the source code. He misrepresents the facts in order to silence criticism by means of DMCA complaints to providers. He (illegally) terminates subscriptions of people who publish an MD5 checksum of their paid-for firmware copy. The list goes on and on.
Don't give money to people who violate the GPL.
gaming router? (Score:3, Insightful)