[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Bob Gustafson <bobgus at rcn dot com>
 To:  "Christopher M. Iarocci" <iarocci at eastendsc dot com>
 Cc:  Monowall User List <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Re: WII behind m0n0wall
 Date:  Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:08:50 -0600
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 20:30 -0500, Christopher M. Iarocci wrote:
> David Burgess wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Christopher M. Iarocci
> > <iarocci at eastendsc dot com> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> I'm afraid my son is going to complain until I replace the m0n0wall with the
> >> POS Linksys that works for his purposes.  Being 7, he of course can not
> >> understand the benefits of one router over another, especially if it doesn't
> >> work as he wants it.
> >>     
> >
> > And the Linksys meets your needs better than m0n0 1.2? If 1.235 works
> > for Tim, then it's worth a try, isn't it?
> >
> > db
> >   
> Actually, neither one of those really meets my needs.  I need 1.3B15 and 
> I'm going to keep it either way.  I just wish someone could explain why 
> a 1:1 works and how I can work around the problem without suggesting I 
> drop 1.3B15.
> Chris

I was clicking around on the Linksys site and I stumbled onto some links
that pointed me to the open source software that Linksys uses in its
routers. Also included was an iptables rule set. It was fairly
extensive. Perhaps looking through that rule set will shed some light on
why the Linksys and m0n0 are different.

I'm not sure I could find that pot of code again, but it wasn't hidden.

Bob G