[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Mark Castle <m0n0wall dash dev at markcastle dot com>
 To:  Andres Petralli <apetralli at icu dot unizh dot ch>
 Cc:  m0n0wall Developer's List <m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] UPNP
 Date:  Tue, 25 Oct 2005 05:56:42 +0100
Andres Petralli wrote:

>
> But hey, maybe this is the whole point about this discussion. Maybe  
> the developers here should define what m0n0wall is about and who the  
> target audience is, wheter it should be a cheap but powerfull  
> firewall/router for everyone or a true substitute to checkpoint  
> firewalls and cisco routers. Personally I think that it is futile to  
> try to replace the later ones and that you can't build a box for home  
> and soho use while also building the same system towards enterprise  
> usage. But I'm fine with a box that is geared towards enthusiast  
> rather than towards enterprises. This is where m0n0wall really could  
> find a solid user base. 

I don't see why you want to pidgeon-hole m0n0wall as a SOHO firewall; it 
is many more things besides that.  m0n0wall can be both a "cheap but 
powerfull  firewall/router" AND it can be a " true substitute to higher 
end[1] firewalls and cisco routers".  Thats part of the beauty of it. 

Re: UPnp: Who would pay the $5,000 annual membership dues for UPnP 
membership & certification?  I can't really see much point implementing 
it if you can't outwardly say you're compatible/compliant with it.

Cheers - Mark


[1] I substituted "checkpoint firewalls" for "higher end firewalls" as 
i've no experience of checkpoint firewalls themselves but plenty of 
experience of other makes / brands.