Thought I'd group my comments in one message...
On 19.06.06 15:06 -0400, Scott Ullrich wrote:
> pfSense welcomes m0n0wall to use and all code from our codebase.
> It will also be helpful for the said party to refer to our CVS
> history as we have hit about every snag that moving m0n0wall to 6.1
> will bring.
Thanks, Scott! I'm sure that whoever does the port can use all the
help (s)he can get!
On 19.06.06 21:26 +0200, Jonathan De Graeve wrote:
> I also think that it would be fair to split a piece of the amount
> of money to the people who did the most of the job.
> (that's up to Manuel to decide offcourse)
No! I think I've made it fairly clear in my message yesterday that,
as far as I'm concerned, the money will only go to one single person.
How it is then distributed is something that the people who do the
work will have to decide.
> For the 1.3 release I think there will be a feature stop and work
> should be focused on getting everything to work in a good way.
Definitely a good idea! Feature creep at this stage will only
increase the time it takes for the first 6.1-based version to be
> PS there should be a 1.3 project coordinator, I'm willing todo that.
Yep - fine by me! However, I don't want to interfere by making any
"official" decisions - let's see how well democracy works on this
mailing list. ;)
On 19.06.06 20:45 -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
> This brings up another point.... What is m0n0wall 1.3 to be? At
> this point, with the description Manuel gave, you could take
> pfsense, s/pfsense/m0n0wall/, change the colors, and almost be
> there. Only thing that wouldn't work at that point would be
> firmware upgrades, and the image would be much too large to update
> current m0n0wall releases.
That's not the intention of course - what is called for is a m0n0wall
version that does nothing more and nothing less than 1.22 (except for
better hardware support, stability etc.), but is based on FreeBSD 6.1
instead of 4.11. No additional features, no substantial changes to
the webGUI looks, no bloat - it should still run on a net45xx if at
> 3 - IPsec changes - We have ipsec-tools, it's time to implement
> many of the enterprise class capabilities that aren't available in
> the GUI now. I haven't looked into this at any great detail at
> this point, but DPD, NAT-T, and Xauth should be considered must
That's true, and any work on this would be very welcome of course,
but it's not strictly asked for as far as the $1000 prize is
> One thing we need to be careful of is scope creep. I'm strongly
> against trying to implement every feature that pfsense has in the
> But let's keep 1.3 pretty basic, and then build off of that for
> future releases in the 1.3 line.
That's the spirit!