Another lost opportunity?

[RegularJoe]

Well it looks like QNAP had beat the guys at iXsystems to the punch again.

A pfSense Firewall VM and a store to buy plug-ins and tech support for pfSense.

https://www.netgate.com/blog/pfsens...72839909&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

 

[jlentz3]

That would be nice to have.

I’m still wary of vm networking for something like a firewall though. It is nice to have a dedicated box for that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RegularJoe]

VMware ESXi has us spoiled, we expect all virtualization platforms to isolate the hardware from the VM. I feel real sorry for the Windows guys that get a plug and play network interface after a reboot of the windows host. LOL

 

[kdragon75]

Well it looks like QNAP had beat the guys at iXsystems to the punch again.

A pfSense Firewall VM and a store to buy plug-ins and tech support for pfSense.

https://www.netgate.com/blog/pfsens...72839909&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

People need to stop using FreeNAS like some catch-all swiss army knife server.

Build you compute, then your storage, and virtualize the rest. Just not your gateway/core router... That's a whopping 3 boxes and one of the can run on as little as 7 watts.

 

[RegularJoe]

tell that to amazon, Microsoft and VMware. Hyper-converged is here to stay. I think vSAN is way too expensive from VMware...

 

[DrKK]

I agree with @kdragon75 , and this is something that I've always just shook my head at. Build your compute, build your storage, especially if you're some SOHO hobbyist like 97% of us are. I have a premium FreeNAS server, with about 10 TiB of storage, built with brand new parts throughout, and we're talking about $1300 or so. "Virtualizing" my storage doesn't save me money, and it doesn't solve any problem I have. I don't understand why so many people insist on it.

But then again, I don't understand why Docker is even a thing. Or why C# is even a thing. So clearly there is something wrong with me.

 

[kdragon75]

I agree with @kdragon75 , and this is something that I've always just shook my head at. Build your compute, build your storage, especially if you're some SOHO hobbyist like 97% of us are. I have a premium FreeNAS server, with about 10 TiB of storage, built with brand new parts throughout, and we're talking about $1300 or so. "Virtualizing" my storage doesn't save me money, and it doesn't solve any problem I have. I don't understand why so many people insist on it.

But then again, I don't understand why Docker is even a thing. Or why C# is even a thing. So clearly there is something wrong with me.

I understand your points. In the computing field whether it be wed design or networking, there are too many layers of abstraction that many people don't understand what's actually happening in the background. I have no issues with complex systems and orchestration tools but when you no longer understand what your orchestration tools are doing, its an issue.

 

[kdragon75]

tell that to amazon, Microsoft and VMware. Hyper-converged is here to stay. I think vSAN is way too expensive from VMware...

VMware is a mature and well documented/supported virtualization stack. FreeNAS is a Hyper-converged joke that is cobbling other people's works together and is largely consumed by people that have no idea how it works. I'll just leave Hyper-V out of this conversation...

 

[RegularJoe]

With VMware we pass thru the PCIe SAS HBA, so FreeNAS really thinks it is running on real hardware. FreeNAS on VMDK files is not a good setup. I think the first Clustered HA FreeNAS node is going to be two FreeNAS servers running on VMware or running on 2 VMware hosts. What FreeNAS needs is some of the clustering from VMS... Clustering today is 30 years behind the systems DEC delivered....