[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Mas Libman" <mas at masandwendy dot com>
 To:  "'Alex Neuman van der Hans'" <alex at nkpanama dot com>, "'Chris Buechler'" <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Re: UPnP as a possible future option?
 Date:  Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:53:58 -0800
Perhaps I'm not privy to the past conversations on UPNP where folks were
rude (apparently?), but this discussion (thus far ;) is far from "moaning or
complaining". If it were not for this thread, I would not have learned about
pfSense, or anything else that folks might recommend to solve this issue. Or
perhaps this thread is how I find others that are want this feature bad
enough that they too are willing to contribute. But, contrary to Chris'
sentiment, the general response has been "I don't want UPNP so shut up and
go away". That is hardly the open source spirit of which he speaks.

I'll look into pfsense this evening and report back. Thanks Alex!

/Mas 

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Neuman van der Hans [mailto:alex at nkpanama dot com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 5:23 PM
Cc: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] Re: UPnP as a possible future option?

Doesn't pfSense (based on m0n0) support uPNP?

Chris Buechler wrote:

>On 11/30/05, Giobbi, Ryan <rgiobbi at agoc dot com> wrote:
>  
>
>>I saw the above challenge in the list archives and found two real 
>>firewall configuration tools (both use IPTables on the backend) that 
>>support UPnP.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Neither of which are real firewall packages, they're configuration 
>interfaces for iptables.  By "real firewall package", I meant a 
>respectable commercial offering.
>
>
>  
>
>>It's kind of sad when most $50 cheap-o home routers support UPnP, but 
>>it isn't even offered as an *option* in m0n0, which is supposed to be 
>>a superior solution.
>>    
>>
>
>My $10,000 Cisco PIX doesn't, and you don't hear me complaining.
>Wait, that must mean the $50 Linksys is superior!!  *gasp*  </sarcasm>
>
>
>In all seriousness, let me explain something.  Open source works when 
>people contribute what they want to see in a project.  It *DOES NOT* 
>work when people do nothing but bitch, moan and complain about what 
>they want and don't do anything about it.  Want uPNP?  Make an image 
>with support that works, and submit the code to Manuel and/or the dev 
>list. Obviously from past threads, those of us that contribute couldn't 
>give a shit less if uPNP is supported or not.  The other alternative is 
>to offer up $X for whoever can implement uPNP.  If X is sufficiently 
>large, someone will do it.  This isn't a whining competition with the 
>winner getting whatever feature they want.
>
>If it doesn't make it into the base system, I would gladly host the 
>uPNP-enabled images on my site, and link to them from the 
>documentation, so the effort wouldn't be for naught.
>
>sorry, tired as hell of this and similar crap that people want to moan 
>about but do nothing to resolve.
>
>-Chris
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>
>  
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch