[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Bryan Kohlstedt <kohlstedt at gmail dot com>
 To:  m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] Survey
 Date:  Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:57:04 -0500
I think that having a number next to each type of platform is a great idea.
I have clients with wrap, 4801, and 1u generic pc. So, that would be a much
more accurate way to collect data.

I also think a modular approach would be nice. (similar to pfsense) The
majority of my installs only use the basics plus some sort of vpn. However,
it would also be nice to have extras that are available when necessary.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the future holds.
 Bryan

 On 10/17/05, Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com> wrote:
>
> On 10/17/05, Manuel Kasper <mk at neon1 dot net> wrote:
> >
> > It's not been launched yet, so please don't fill it in yet - but have
> > a look at the proposed questions/answers and let us know if you think
> > anything should be changed:
> >
> > http://m0n0.ch/wall/survey.php
> >
>
> some comments:
>
> - platform should be checkboxes, IMO. I can't answer that question in
> a way that wouldn't be misleading, as I have Soekris 4501, 4801, WRAP,
> and PC's in production. Maybe even a number next to each platform
> check box?
>
> - on the questions where you can enter a number, if you have multiple
> boxes, I think it should be noted that you should use the median
> specification amongst your installations
>
> - on Yes/No questions, I'd imagine people will be allowed to skip
> questions, but we may want to make note of that or put in a field for
> "other", i.e. indifferent/"don't know"/"don't care" or something.
>
> - on IPsec, I guess that feature wraps up NAT-T and other things, but
> I think we may want to re-word that option. Maybe something like
> "Enterprise-class IPsec support (dynamic IP, NAT-T, DPD, Xauth
> support, etc.)"
>
> one last concern, just making sure appropriate input validation is
> done (where it says check 3, you can only check 3 or less, in RAM
> require between 32 and 8000 or something, etc.) We can clean up data
> later, of course, but it would be best to keep the data as clean and
> reasonable as we can up front.
>
>
> > Also, do you think we should set a fixed date when the survey will
> > end (and how much time should we give it in that case), or just sit
> > and wait until we think enough of them have been submitted (as was
> > done with the first survey)?
> >
>
> well... I'd say go with no end date at first, then once we think we
> have sufficient replies, give it another week and send out another
> announcement with the newly-determined deadline.
>
> -Chris
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>
>