[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Neil A. Hillard" <m0n0 at dana dot org dot uk>
 To:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Monowall comparison to Smoothwall Express?
 Date:  Sat, 13 May 2006 11:02:04 +0100

In message <000601c6763f$fab019e0$0abea8c0@qoakzmijn>, MN
<mnelson at nels dash sec dot com> writes
>m0n0wall does not have the IDS, Squid Proxy, and ssh (natively) access.
>Otherwise m0n0wall is rock solid and without bloat. The DHCP is just as easy
>to run on m0n0wall as it is on Smoothwall.
>You will need to run the IDS and Squid processing elsewhere if you want to
>run m0n0wall on a small package like the Soekris/Wrap boards.
>Note: If you're looking for more stuff and in a FreeBSD box, look at
>pFsense.  If want it all on a Linux box, try Endian firewall rather than
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Brian McEntire [mailto:brian dot mcentire at gmail dot com]
>Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 10:12 PM
>To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>Subject: [m0n0wall] Monowall comparison to Smoothwall Express?
>I'm very impressed with Monowall and will probably replace my home f/w
>(Smoothwall Express) with it. I am using the DHCP server on Smoothwall and I
>see Monowall has that functionality listed as one of it's features.
>Has anyone made this switch? Are there any features you used in Smoothwall
>that you had to implement somewhere else on your network b/c they weren't
>part of Monowall? I'm just looking out for gotchas that might not be obvious
>at first glance.

Quite a long time ago I switched from Smoothwall to IPCop for various
reasons and then once I discovered M0n0wall I switched immediately.

M0n0wall gave me much more flexibility for what I wanted to do - I
wanted to be in control of the rules and not have to live with
predetermined rules built into IPCop and Smoothwall.

With M0n0wall I now have OPT1 and WAN bridged which I couldn't do with
the other two.  True it doesn't have an IDS or an HTTP proxy but I can
live without those.  It doesn't have ssh but I've never needed it.  Yes,
I'm one who likes to get under the bonnet and tinker but I've never
found it necessary with M0n0wall.

M0nowall is much lighter on disk space and mine's been running for over
a year (not continuously, though) from an 8Mb CF card.  IPCop from CF I
don't feel is ideal.

I still keep an eye on IPCop to see what's going on and I have one
customer still using it but I'll be switching them over to M0n0wall when
I get the chance.

I also use M0n0wall in the office on a test broadband line and use the
Traffic Shaper as a WAN simulator.



Neil A. Hillard                E-Mail:   m0n0 at dana dot org dot uk