From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Apr 24 08:15:40 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA10930 for isp-outgoing; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sand.sentex.ca (sand.sentex.ca [206.222.77.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA10910; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:15:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gravel (gravel.sentex.ca [205.211.165.210]) by sand.sentex.ca (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA01437; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:20:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970424111952.00a1f1e0@sentex.net> X-Sender: mdtancsa@sentex.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:19:52 -0400 To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org, security@freebsd.org From: Mike Tancsa Subject: Commercial vs built in firewall capabilities of FreeBSD Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk After looking around a lot of the firewall sites and browsing through the firewall list archives, I am still not entirely clear what a commercial firewall costing $10K U.S. would give me over the basic firewalling capabilities in FreeBSD combined with sshd, NAT, proxy servers and or SOCKS v5... Although VPN would be a very nice feature to have to link up remote offices, if this is not necessary, should we reccomend to the client to go out and spend $10K on a commercial firewall solution as opposed to a FreeBSD box ? ---Mike ********************************************************************** Mike Tancsa (mike@sentex.net) * To do is to be -- Nietzsche Sentex Communications Corp, * To be is to do -- Sartre Cambridge, Ontario * Do be do be do -- Sinatra (http://www.sentex.net/~mdtancsa) *