[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Jonathan De Graeve" <Jonathan dot De dot Graeve at imelda dot be>
 To:  "PlanAlpha" <plan dot alpha at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  "monowall" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Enterprise m0n0wall?
 Date:  Fri, 25 Nov 2005 20:43:35 +0100
> I do a lot of firewall installations for
> mostly large customers who pay a lot for their firewalls and don't
> really get a lot. Being an open source advocate I like to push open
> source solutions, but in the enterprise market it isn't always very
> easy. People don't understand what open source really is about and
> really like the warm fuzzy illusion of having "someone who they can
> call." One customer said they'd never use f/oss but bought a Nokia
> cluster...which runs IPSO...which is FreeBSD...
> So I've been thinking about what it would take to put m0n0wall in to
> the enterprise setting. The easy part is using a decent hardware
> platform. I've been looking at something like this:
> http://www.mbx.com/oem/reference_platforms/RP-1013.cfm

Very nice boxes :D

> 
> Some of hurdles that come to mind:
> -	Commercial support
> -	Features of the base images
> 
> Have any of the m0n0 developers considered setting themselves up to be
> a commercial entity that still devs open code but will support it
> commercially? (which in my opinion is a GREAT business model)

I'm willing to if there are enough questions for it in my country
(Belgium)
I already have a VAT number so that wouldn't be the problem...

> I was also thinking about the feasibility of having an "Enterprise"
> generic-pc image that would be geared for bigger implementations, (for
> example, having higher number of pptp connections,  clustering,
> grouping of network objects, etc...)
I suggested this in the survey but it seems not all people seem to know
what I've meant or just said NO.

<SNIP>
Would you like different images with different feature sets (like e.g.
Cisco IOS)? (base, plus, advanced, enterprise, advanced enterprise...)
answers: 97%
Yes  48% 
No  49%
</SNIP> 

> I think m0n0wall is glaring example of how good open source can be,
> and I'd like to be able to leverage it in more environments. Kudos to
> all of the folks who develop and contribute to the project!
Maybe true but it lacks some support to use it in real enterprise
envi's. (multi PPTP pass-through, IPSEC NAT-T support, dynamic routing)

I made a test image with dynamic routing but currently it isn't
maintained because the work I spent into the RADIUS images is really
much. Other question is should this be for m0n0wall of is it better for
pfsense?

Furthermore I've seen the code and its UGLY, believe me... (but you can
say: it works right???)

J.


--
Jonathan De Graeve
Network/System Administrator
Imelda vzw
Informatica Dienst
015/50.52.98
Jonathan dot de dot graeve at imelda dot be