|
||||||||||
Greetings, I agree, they should acknowledge m0n0wall for (probably) lifting the php config stuff, but since they are running on a different OS, and have made a number of changes, it doesn't look like a simple copy. The two things on there that I see and like (mainly because I am doing them "on the side" on my pfsense and m0n0wall boxes are: dynamic interfaces (GRE in my case) BGPd Chris Jim Thompson wrote: > well, they didn't list it in their license page: > http://www.6wind.com/PDF/prod/web-management/license.html > > I think its best to a) notify the company and b) get busy adding IPv6 > support to m0n0wall (and/or pfSense). 6wind runs over the > top of MontaVista Linux, not FreeBSD, and we all know how *wrong* that > decision can be. > > We the coming release of pfSense on ixp42x-based systems, > m0n0wall/pfSense may start to look at lot more attractive for embedded > routers. > > Jim > > On Mar 2, 2007, at 10:29 AM, krt wrote: > >> >> If this is really not just a common underlying php framework issue, >> it might be best to avoid any negative publicity. In any event, has >> anyone verified the interface beyond the appearance? >> >> Assuming that this is a license violation, I'm willing to bet that the >> 6Wind company would donate some gear, hosting under contract, and/or >> money to the m0n0wall project in exchange for a special non-disclosure >> license. The m0n0wall project would receive resources. The company >> would save face before their customers and support the software >> pipeline that a critical portion of their product, and therefore >> business, is based off of. >> >> While 6Wind needs to tow the line, there may be few reasons to >> negatively affect both parties when both can benefit from this situation. >> >> >> Lee Sharp wrote: >>> Timothy Taylor wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I was rather surprised to discover a firewall that has an astonishingly >>>> similar interface to m0n0wall >>>> <http://www.6wind.com/PDF/prod/web-management/license.html> but without >>>> any credit to Manuel et al. Should I be disturbed or surprised? I >>>> haven't actually used the product, I just came across the pages >>>> during a >>>> Google search on "snmp firewall rule". >>> Flagrant license violation. From the m0n0wall license page; >>> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without >>> modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions >>> are met: >>> 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright >>> notice, >>> this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. >>> 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright >>> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the >>> documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. >>> They are in clear violation of #2. Manuel has them by the balls. I >>> think he can get damages, and force them to notify all customers. :) >>> Lee >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > |