What OS do you use for GNS3?

I've heard Linux is the best, and somehow I accepted this as fact without anyone doing benchmarks or noticing a difference. The bridging between virtual routers and real equipment is a pain in the ass, now because of this I'm thinking of just putting Windows on my GNS3 box.

For those of you who use Windows, is there a limit to the number of connections you can create? (I'm thinking multiple 4 port NICs connected to real switches).

Do you use Windows 7 x86 or x64? Windows XP? Server 2003/2008? I'd like to hear from you!

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

stuh84

Can't really say as I don't use GNS3, I use Dynamips/Dynagen.

As for bridging to a real interface, this is why I prefer Dynamips/Dynagen. For all the messing about you'll do in GNS3, this is all I have to do is this

e0/0 = NIO_linux_eth:eth0

That connects the ethernet interface of the router to my Linux boxes eth0 interface. Works straight away.

bermovick

I'll use windows 7 (x64) if I'm just cobbling together something small/quick, but will reboot to x64 Debian if I need to make a 'beefier' lab. There's a definite increase in performance, which I attribute to linux's better handling of ram (I only have 2G in this machine, with 256M shared to onboard video).

ehnde

stuh84 wrote: »

Can't really say as I don't use GNS3, I use Dynamips/Dynagen.

As for bridging to a real interface, this is why I prefer Dynamips/Dynagen. For all the messing about you'll do in GNS3, this is all I have to do is this

e0/0 = NIO_linux_eth:eth0

That connects the ethernet interface of the router to my Linux boxes eth0 interface. Works straight away.

You didn't need to make any changes to /etc/network/interfaces in linux?

What about tunctl? You didn't have to do any bridging? Holy crap dude.....MIND = BLOWN

stuh84

ehnde wrote: »

You didn't need to make any changes to /etc/network/interfaces in linux? What about tunctl? You didn't have to do any bridging? Holy crap dude.....MIND = BLOWN

Not one bit. Another reason why I just don't get GNS3. The fact that people are scared of editing a couple of text files to get stuff working, yet are running Multiprotocol BGP or complex MPLS topologies on it which are a hundred times harder than building the files....

Dynamips / Dynagen Tutorial

Read that, and have fun

thehourman

I will be using Ubuntu for my GNS3; however, I will be using Intel's Sandy Bridge. I read some stuff online that the Sandy Bridge is not working well with Linux yet.

tiersten

thehourman wrote: »

I will be using Ubuntu for my GNS3; however, I will be using Intel's Sandy Bridge. I read some stuff online that the Sandy Bridge is not working well with Linux yet.

It works fine. The issue is that the integrated GPU needs new drivers to work properly which aren't in any of the current distributions. You need to rebuild the X server manually or replace the packages if you want better than VGA/VESA.

tiersten

I run Dynamips on a stripped down Linux distribution on an ESX cluster.

The "Beowulf Cluster of XBox 360s" option makes no sense anyway as its PowerPC and has awful Dynamips performance as the JIT translation doesn't work. I know its a joke option :P

seekrit

I use GNS3 to build a topology, then just use Dynagen/Dynampis. It's much faster for me to build a .net file that way.

bermovick

seekrit wrote: »

I use GNS3 to build a topology, then just use Dynagen/Dynampis. It's much faster for me to build a .net file that way.

Do you notice any improvement over just starting it in GNS3?

thehourman

The problem they are having with Sandy Bridge will be my problem because I will be using the H67 chipset.
I have no idea what an X server is. I am a Linux noob.

tiersten

thehourman wrote: »

I have no idea what an X server is. I am a Linux noob.

The X server is the underlying component that actually interfaces with your graphics hardware.

If this box is just going to run Dynamips and you'll be running GNS3 on another machine or just SSHing to this box then the lack of accelerated graphics or an awful screen resolution isn't going to be a big deal anyway.

The support for Sandy Bridge exists. It just wasn't integrated into the major distributions in time as Intel were slow on getting the drivers and specifications released.

alan2308

Linux, because that's what I use for everything else.

chmorin

I use Windows 7 x64 and GNS3, on a 4GB ram box. I have been able to run 8 3745's at the same time running BGP/EIGRP/OSPF/TSHOOT topology stuff and with proper idlepc values, your CPU stays reasonable after the routers load the IOS image. Presently I have not had any problems annoying enough to deal with dual-booting my box. I just run virtual box and link up their NIC's with GNS3 routers and everything seems to work just fine.

seekrit

bermovick wrote: »

Do you notice any improvement over just starting it in GNS3?

Nope, When you open up a topology.net file generated in GNS3 you need to change the path to the working dir and config's and get rid of all the x-y coordinates. It's just faster for me, but I have my own Rack and don't use .net files much. I suppose if I did I would be a lot more proficient at creating .net files.