> As with any two different solutions you're comparing, the PIX can do some
things m0n0wall can't, and the reverse is true as well.

Right, I am thinking we should/could provide a more comprehensive comparison
between the two directly. PIX OS 7 added a lot of new functions to the PIX.

-J


On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Jimmy Bones (Mhottie)
> <mhottie at gmail dot com> wrote:
> > Hey Manuel and Guys,
> >
> > Been using m0n0 for a long time now and happy to see 1.31 out.
> >
> > This has been asked many times in the past (last reference I could find
> was
> > in 2006) and I think we should re-visit the topic briefly.
> >
> > PIX Vs m0n0wall -
> >
> > You can get PIX OS 7.2 on the 506e hardware easily. This is a Pentium III
> > 300 (600 in my case) and 256mb Ram (upgradeable comes with 32mb).
> >
> > Using 7.2 as a reference point and m0n0 1.31 - can we can get a good
> > compare/contrast/performance going for this?
> >
>
> Things really haven't changed since it was last discussed. As with any
> two different solutions you're comparing, the PIX can do some things
> m0n0wall can't, and the reverse is true as well. It depends on what
> you specifically need in your network as to which is a better fit, or
> whether either would suffice.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>