Thinking about the future of Mon0wall....
Matt Groener wrote:
> My first pass at thoughts about the future:
> 1. Keep up with FreeBSD (base the next release on 6, etc.)
I'm prefer NetBSD for portability (a big number of embedded platforms to
> 2. I agree a core/module approach would work well and improve some
> current issues and allow for future growth.
> 3. PHP and Java aren't well suited to the m0n0wall tenets (small, fast,
> clean), in my opinion. Java is slow and overly complex, PHP is not
> complex enough. I will refrain from starting a programming holy war but
> humbly offer Perl/python as suitable core bases.
I think the same, I like Java but maybe python is a better option
> 4. IDS plugin's or a modular IDS solution should be part of the larger
the idea of an architecture based on modules seems very good to me and
would allow a fast incorporation of all type of new functions
> 5. Fixes for general issues that plague me personally, like slow
> recovery of IPSEC tunnels, etc.
maybe work for a last m0n0wall 1.x with the old architecture but in a
new FreeBSD release (a new try with 5.x for the final 1.x release)
> 6. Revamp the tunnel/partition terminology and implementation to make it
> simpler to decide what you want and how to implement it (do I want a
> partition or a b/w cap, etc?) I hate to say "Wizard" but it couldn't
> And lastly:
> 7. Keep up the excellent level of quality and durability that has made
> me such a big fan of m0n0wall in the first place.
the most important think