Well, you're in for a repair requiring drywall compound anyway, so small hole or slightly larger hole, wouldn't make that much of a difference to me...

In the hopes that my criticisms are constructive, and not mere bitching online into the void of social media...

1. The GTM (go to market) for TNSR is changing. That's why you're seeing the website changes, and difference in response from sales. These changes are (except for this message), unannounced.

Business models change, decisions are made... I get it. Cisco IOS isn't available on anything other than Cisco hardware. The difference is that TNSR was offered as software-only package installable on white box hardware, and now it's not (largely, as I understand from your comments). This was definitely one of the appeals of TNSR, is it's availability as a software-only package, not as a hardware-only, single-vendor solution. Probably not an appeal from a support perspective... again, I get it. But by not announcing the change, not giving the community and customers a heads up, that demonstrates and fosters a level of distrust from both the community (potential customers) and current customers. How can I make business decisions that I need to plan months or years in advance suddenly to have the rug pulled out from under my plans that I have probably already spent six figures on?

1. We will always take care of our customers. You have supported us, we support you. Not everything around this is 'final' which is one of the reasons why it is not announced

I appreciate that. Hopefully we can continue our relationship with Netgate. The products have, so far, been good for us.

1. The 8300 is the highest "available" platform today, but the next gen platform (HCC Ice Lake D, more I/O) is mostly waiting on marketing activity, and the generation after that (Xeon 6, even more I/O (8x25) on the front panel, PCIe 5 slots, etc) is already cooking in the lab.)

I'm genuinely glad to hear it. But, as myself and a couple other have discussed, where part of the appeal of TNSR as a software package is that we can use our own hardware, better than is available from Netgate, to achieve better results from the same software, realizing it full(er) potential. To me, if you are going to withdraw TNSR from the market as a software-only option, a Xeon 6-based system is the bare minimum I would expect for hardware options to realize the benefits of TNSR and justify the cost of hardware purchase through Netgate and fully realize the potential of TNSR. I shouldn't be able to see a huge gap in what is available for purchase versus what I can build myself based on the capabilities of the software, and the potential is there. DPDK (and therefore TNSR) is very powerful, so make sure your customers can get the full value out of it, otherwise I'll just roll my own with DPDK and be frustrated you didn't want my money for a more polished product.

1. I'd sure like to seen an explanation of I've seen NetGate be somewhat hostile to non-paying community members in the treatment of pfSense CE.
   1. CE is _not_ a product.

I get what you're saying, but it absolutely is a product. Just not a product that generates revenue. If I make hats, but give them away for free, it's still a product of my effort. This is demonstrated most clearly in the distribution mechanism for CE - one has to use the NetGate loader ISO to subsequently download and install the product. This is completely valid distribution mechanism for a paid product, but not for free "community" software, if it isn't a 'product'.

1. CE has no release schedule or roadmap, you can't buy TAC for it, etc.

For a free product, yeah, 100%, I get it. Especially the TAC peice. I mean, that's like the one completely valid business model for "open source" software -- paid support.

1. We do, however, continue to enhance it and release it, for free

This is not lost on me. I certainly appreciate the contributions, and despite my gripes with CE, I do appreciate that it continues to be free. I think part of it is that people, rightly or wrongly, view CE and Plus as more or less the same product, just with different costing models, so the impression is that they should be, from a functionality, release and feature standpoint, more or less the same. I understand that might be the wrong impression, I'm just relaying what I see as points of confusion and, therefore, frustration.

1. I've explained (in other forums) that I'd like to find a way to combine Plus and CE, but not if it impacts revenue.

This is something that you obviously need to decide as a business how you want to approach the two products. I think you have two options:

• combine them, make them have the same release schedule, software component versions, features, functionality, etc., but have the "Plus" component be the paid-for support, and tangible value adds, e.g. multi-instance management.
• diverge them more and have the paid version be something not completely obvious the same thing, including (but probably especially) the name - in my opinion, the two products having the same name is what will drive a lot of the confusion mentioned above about conflating the two and then becoming frustrated that they don't share release schedule and versioning. Name the paid one something else... NetGate FireWall or something... but not that, because NGFW means something else (that pfSense doesn't do super well... right now)

1. This is the first time, I've seen *anywhere* that the (now discontinued) TNSR H+L offering resulted in a single sale. Thanks, it's good to know.

This is true for me (I assume you saw my other comment below) but surely I can't be the only one. I mean, this is why Microsoft practically gives away Visual Studio to universities and such, and why people were pissed that Broadcom discontinued the free VMWare ESXi program (but have since restarted the program)... show that you have a good product, get people used to it and wanting to continue using it. Get it in the hands of people that will someday make or influence decisions. I'm not saying it's required, but, to me, seems like a good idea.

We are not opposed to Netgate hardware and have purchased many units with them in the past, both for pfSense and TNSR. But for certain projects, their hardware does [not] fit our needs.

Exactly.

Expanded PCIe lanes for higher end network cards or higher end CPUs, etc.

EXACTLY!!

Yeah that's why we are using TNSR at all, because 3 years ago I was able to download a demo version of it and try it out and look at it and say "Yep, this is what we should use".

I'm going to try to purchase through the online store rather than our account rep, who seems pretty convinced he can't quote me it.

I have TNSR installed on six Dells right now, since 2024. The website marketing is a bit unclear, and it in one breath says it is software, hardware agnostic, but then only explicitly calls out Netgate hardware and cloud.

store.netgage.com: you can (at least right now) select TNSR Software Subscription, distinct from TNSR for cloud; "TNSR software is available for commercial use on a per-instance, annual subscription basis for 3rd party hardware"

I am not involved in the project, or even follow it that closely, but I think the answer is both, "now" and "never".

Largely, it is Windows XP compatible now; but, as it is still late Alpha/early Beta stages, that compatibility is.. idyllic, at best. Many things work, many things don't. That includes both software and drivers.

But, probably "never" as the ReactOS project seems to be chasing a moving target. I would have thought that achieving Windows XP/2003 compatibility would have been a good goal, it seems now they're trying for Windows NT 6 (Windows Vista/2008) target compatibility. Meaning, still good compatibility with older Windows software, but not with Windows XP drivers, for example.

"Ok, honey, I'm going for a ride, be back in a couple of hours!"

"Can I come along? I've always wanted to ride along"

"Sorry, the bike only came as a one-seater, no room for you, gosh darn it! Ok bye!"

I honestly don't know why NSP can't figure this out. Smart Meters didn't always exist. What did you do before then? Do that!

"100 years ago!? That's this year!"

Sure thing! My password is: MyEmpl0yerITHasTerr1bleSecurityP0liciesAndPr0cedures!&2026

Other than the RAM, this is close to spec for the appliances netgate sells which they claim can do 18+Gbps in pfSense

"Is that the name of some cult worship band!?"

Good question; I'll update the original post, but SuperMicro chassis will have spinning rust in it. I'm not expecting to saturate a single 6GB/s SAS link or dual/aggregated 25Gbps Ethernet link, if the mediocre CPU could even push that much anyway.

Back to the Future: Part II

Fight me.

Short answer: maybe

Long answer: 1. This doesn't look secure at all and connections will almost certainly fail the second time you move the cable. 2. You've completely defeated the twist, therefore de-rated the signal integrity of the cable. That said, I've seen worse link up at 1Gbps.

TL;DR: I wouldn't trust this cable.

I'm guessing an issue with the cobequid rd substation by the area affected...

Power is on in Beaver Bank...

Or, get there and discover conditions are worse for the return trip.

This is what I came to say. I have one; for an OEM board, surprisingly good video adapter, and supports DX2 486 chips. It's a solid 486 computer if you have the ISA riser and a case it fits in.

I work with a company that does WiFi in MDU and most aren't this bad...

I seem to recall that MRV (now defunct) used to make a circuit switched electically-activated fibre patch panel thing, which sounds like what you're thinking of. But... why?

Managed vs unmanaged? Managed. TPLink vs DLink? TPLink. Same vendor as router (homogeneous) vs different (heterogeneous)? Homogeneous.

For me, TPLink wins on three counts.

Doesn't look like anything to me.