jnheinz Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Am I right in thinking you have an IBM branded Intel Quad NIC? I had one passed completely through to a pfSense VM and had uPnP issues with online gaming where it would disconnect me after five minutes or so, so if uPnP is important to your network you may want to consider bare metal instead. Granted, I was using all four ports (WAN, LAN, and two additional WiFi APs). When I was using an Intel dual NIC card in a VM it was fine. These are the relevant bits for passthrough: 07:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 06) 07:00.1 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 06) 08:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 06) 08:00.1 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 06) Try passing just 08:00.0 & 08:00.1 to the VM using this sticky. It may work... it may not. Story of my life. Doesn't seem to work. I need to hook up a monitor to get to the BIOS & take a look at the NICs I have. A 100Mbit NIC would be fine for the WAN.. I believe I may have some 3Com NICs from 15-20 years ago. Quote Link to comment
Garani Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 A 100Mbit NIC would be fine for the WAN.. Unless you are segregating your wireless network on that segment (ie: your wan router serves as a wireless AP too). In that case 100mbit will be tight pretty much soon I believe I may have some 3Com NICs from 15-20 years ago. Be careful, you are getting way too close to legacy land Quote Link to comment
METDeath Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The other option is to give unRAID the on board Realtek and pass through the whole Intel NIC card. I ran my primary unRAID box on a Realtek NIC for a loooong time. The only reason I switched is because I got a Supermicro board with dual Intel NICs. Quote Link to comment
jnheinz Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I checked my stock, I have some newer Intel quad ports, Intel dual ports, a Broadcom quad port, a few 10/100 3Com 3C905B (a very, very popular card in its time.. I would be extremely surprised if this was NOT supported). Obviously all PCIe except the 3Com. So, I googled it.. example, pci-stub.ids=8086:153b .. 8086 is the vendor ID for Intel, 153b is actually the product ID. So you are blacklisting a specific model of Intel from the OS. I could put a different adapter in made by Intel and it should not be blacklisted? Reason I brought up the 10/100 card, is my internet is 18/3Mbps.. and the 10/100 card could actually have a use for my 1 PCI slot. I would not mind using it for the WAN port. I wouldn't mind using the Realtek either, I just really, really prefer Intel or Broadcom in *nix. I do server administration on VMware & Windows Server for a living. Quote Link to comment
Garani Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 And you are right: 3com is way better the Realtek, hands down. Thought be careful of "old" hardware:?i had a glitch on a 10/100 3com board that was hard to troubleshoot, until I moved to a newer Intel board. Yeah, Intel boards are quite something Quote Link to comment
okimdone Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 sorry to bring this back up but in UnRAID v6 Beta 19 is it still necessary to put this info into the GO file? Quote Link to comment
csmccarron Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Garani, is it possible to create a 2nd bond using the go file? I just added a 4 port ethernet card and want to bond all 4 as bond1. bond0 contains the 2 motherboard nics. Thanks, Chris Quote Link to comment
Garani Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share Posted June 23, 2016 Never done, but I don't see why not in theory. In practice some testing should be done. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.