[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  SDamron <sdamron at gmail dot com>
 To:  "Tim Nelson" <tnelson at fudnet dot info>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] 6.1 Port
 Date:  Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:47:03 -0500
Agreed, m0n0 is best suited if you just need a firewall, but if you
need other things, such as wireless, radius, etc, pfsence is great.
As far as stability, I have a pfsense that has been up for well over a
month, no problems.

On 7/26/06, Tim Nelson <tnelson at fudnet dot info> wrote:
> Quoting Dinesh Nair <dinesh at alphaque dot com>:
> >
> >> the 1.3 ALPHA images of m0n0wall are based on freebsd 6.1 and yes,
> >> they're still in alpha stage so they do have bugs. this can be
> >> downloaded from the m0n0wall downloads page.
> >>
> >> in addition, the sources and kernel patches for the 6.1 version have
> >> been available from m0n0's subversion repository under
> >> branches/freebsd6.
> >>
> >> as i'm (seemingly) the only one using and testing 1.3 at the moment,
> >> development is admittedly a little slow. i'd welcome more to the
> >> effort, especially on platforms i dont have inhouse (WRAP, net48xx) to
> >> test on.
> >
> > Dinesh,
> >
> > I have a spare WRAP here that I'd happily use for testing of the 6.1
> > version. Just tell me what needs testing and I'll get on it. I've got
> > Linux and Windows clients here. Feel free to email me directly or
> > start a new thread on the list.
> >
> > Personally, I'd really like to see m0n0 move forward with better
> > hardware compatibility, improved wireless support etc. pfSense is
> > great but I still think there's a place for m0n0wall :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris Taylor
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
> >
> I am also available for testing! I have a Nokia IP330 and an IP440 that
> I could put to use for this task. Of course, various x86 boxes are also
> lying around that could be used as well.
>
> pfSense seems to be mentioned quite frequently here. Many times, it is
> offered as a replacement to monowall. Yes, it does have more features
> but I have found it to be not as stable as m0n0(even in spite of the
> [m0n0wall] Version 1.22 Freeze thread...). Also, it has a larger
> footprint that is not suitable for many of the platforms m0n0 can run on
> reliably. Both have their place and function however I still believe
> m0n0 to be superior.
>
> Please let me know how I am able to help!
>
> --Tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>


-- 
-------------------------------
"Nothing on earth can overcome an absolutely non-resistant person."