[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160830172554.GD7782@gremlin.ru>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 20:25:54 +0300
From: gremlin@...mlin.ru
To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: new Owl
On 2016-08-28 18:33:32 +0300, croco@...nwall.com wrote:
>>> We'll need to decide on whether and what to do with Owl next,
>>> beside the prolonged life support. One possibility is turning
>>> it into a smaller (and safer?) OpenVZ 7 hosting platform
>> That's how I use it.
>> Besides being the virtualization host, Owl perfectly fits for
>> small services normally running in a VDS (for me, that's only
>> OpenVPN) or in VPS
> Colleagues, could you pay attention to another possible task
> Owl perfectly fits, namely a router/NAT box, primarily for
> SOHO environment?
Yes: small Atom-based PC can replace and outperform all commonly
used SOHO devices, such as NAT boxes, switches, NASes, P2P clients
media servers etc.
> I actually used Owl as a router for approx. 12 years (well,
> there was a P1 box with two ethernets running Owl). I decided
> to retire that box when I actually realized that it consumes
> a notable amount of electricity running 24*7, generating a lot
> of noise with all these coolers,
I use just a 9-years-old Core Quad Q6600-based server capable of
running one VDS and several VPSes, which consumes approx. 200 kW*h
of electricity; for me, it worth the money I pay for that.
> and a tiny Raspberry Pi will do exactly the same at almost no
> electricity cost and with no noise at all.
When you need just a little more than a simple NAT box, that's the
most obvious solution.
> I would continue using Owl for that purpose but I failed at
> my attempts to build it for Raspberry,
That's ARM, which is a completely different architecture. However,
I think I'd be able to build Owl for my BPI-R1 board once I'd find
how to boot it (1) with custom kernel built by me and (2) with root
partition on a hard disk or at least on a USB flash.
> so my RasPi now runs Raspbian.
Fffffuuuuuuuuu...
> From the other hand, there are some (actually, many) devices
> that are able to run OpenWRT;
All those devices I know of are MIPS-based, which gives us yet
another completely different architecture.
> I think Owl, if it existed for these devices, could be better
> option than OpenWRT.
Owl would be too big for them... Typical OpenWRT fits into a 8Mb
Flash ROM and runs in 32 (or even 16) Mb of RAM.
> Furthermore, I wouln't be too surprized to see quagga being
> included into Owl or at least being available as a package,
> making Owl PC a good cheap replacement for a Cisco router :-)
Yes, it should be added to "must have" packages list for Owl.
Now, this list (reflecting my personal preferences and needs)
contains the following:
1. Packages which should be available "out-of-box":
dovecot
git
minicom
msmtp
nginx
openvpn
ppp
qemu
quagga
rsync
tcpdump
trafshow
wget
2. Other packages (I already have built them):
centerim
gd
httpd
jabberd2
libjpeg
libpng
mc
mongodb
mysql (mariadb)
php
postgresql
samba
squid
--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
GPG: 8832FE9FA791F7968AC96E4E909DAC45EF3B1FA8
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
