[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Jonathan De Graeve" <Jonathan dot De dot Graeve at imelda dot be>
 To:  "Andres Petralli" <apetralli at icu dot unizh dot ch>
 Cc:  <m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall-dev] UPNP
 Date:  Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:47:16 +0200
>In m0n0wall everything, or at least most of it is built around NAT  
>and using the box as a router for internet lines where only one ore a  
>>few IP addresses are available. This already does disqualify it as a  
>solution for medium and bigger sized companies. Other things like  
>PPPoE also indicate, that m0n0walls target user group is rather the  
>adsl and cable ISP user than companies that connect their network to  
>carriers with fibre lines.

Hey you forget the static ip option of M0n0wall which is well suitable
for fibre lines :)

>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.

Who says M0n0wall isn't good for Enterprise use? FreeBSD certainly is!
IMHO I think that the most developing has been done by people working in
some kind of enterprise environment.

> 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  
>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.

Lets wait for the survey to end. I think we will be surprised which kind
of usergroup we have and stop this UPNP thread