Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:24:09 +0200
From:      Beat Siegenthaler <beat.siegenthaler@beatsnet.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: WiFi HotSpot
Message-ID:  <4CBD63B9.3090805@beatsnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinGe0ZW%2BsNg060xdBHtMbPSSEdoWUTusVCk-rB-@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4CBCCA35.1020607@locolomo.org>	<E194A4DE220BBE4FAF3AB7C4E7EDA08601070F68@svmailmel.bytecraft.internal>	<9EA5C4ECCF740346B3FFB246D0AD05EA02693350@exchange.tcc.to> <AANLkTinGe0ZW%2BsNg060xdBHtMbPSSEdoWUTusVCk-rB-@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 On 19.10.10 03:03, Adam Vande More wrote:
> I would recommend staying away from m0n0wall.  It's poorly supported now,
> and buggy.  Example:
> http://forum.m0n0.ch/index.php?PHPSESSID=1t2d5fp3t82ghgc7a7crmd0653&topic=2025.15
>
I see no evidence of "buggy" there. And are you really in the position
to judge about "poor support" in a OSS project ;-)
> it blocks NAT packets with both Keep-State and OOW set and it's not a lot of
> fun to track down.
>
Agree.
But there are other questions: Is telnet the state of art for this
environment? Maybe a encryption Layer would make some points obsolete?
> pfSense or rolling your own may be a better option.
>
Using both m0n0 and pfSense: Both have their flaws.
And yes, if pfSense supports IPv6, i will drop my m0n0's

Beat



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CBD63B9.3090805>