[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Nik Clayton <nik at ngo dot org dot uk>
 To:  Hilton Travis <Hilton at QuarkAV dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Feature request which would make m0n0wall even better ;)
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:43:27 +0000
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:14:12AM +1000, Hilton Travis wrote:
> Nope, it wouldn't.  Adding extra functionality to a firewall is like
> asking that your toaster also boil the kettle.  It is just not designed
> for that.
> Adding NTP will then have people asking for ident, then eventually
> Samba.  Believe me, I've seen this happen before.  :)

What I think a lot of these requests are expressing is a need for

  a) A mono<foo> that's not designed to be a firewall, but that is 
     designed to provide these sorts of 'small' services for smallish


     and so on, or

  b) A plugin framework that lets people write these things themselves,
     safe in the knowledge that the next update isn't going to stomp
     all over them.

C.R.F. Consulting ltd                                W: 01895 466 766
                                                     M: 07973 840 839