Is there a market for an open source router? - Linux

This is a discussion on Is there a market for an open source router? - Linux ; "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip supplier Broadcom. Netgear is definitely ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Is there a market for an open source router?

  1. Is there a market for an open source router?


    "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    supplier Broadcom.

    Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."

    http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550

    -RFH


  2. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    6:07 PM:

    >
    > "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    > ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    > exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    > supplier Broadcom.
    >
    > Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >
    > http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >
    > -RFH
    >

    That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine... set it and, for the most
    part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
    amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
    important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
    on a desktop computer).


    --
    "Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
    be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates



  3. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit

    wrote
    on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    :
    > "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    > a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    > 6:07 PM:
    >
    >>
    >> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >> supplier Broadcom.
    >>
    >> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>
    >> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>
    >> -RFH
    >>

    > That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...


    Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
    routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    common anyway, making a software solution practical.

    (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)

    > set it and, for the most
    > part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
    > amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
    > important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
    > on a desktop computer).
    >


    The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C++ Programming Idea #889123:
    std::vector<...> v; for(int i = 0; i < v.size(); i++) v.erase(v.begin() + i);
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    In article
    ,
    Ramon F Herrera wrote:
    > "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    > ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    > exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    > supplier Broadcom.
    >
    > Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >
    > http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550


    That blogger is a bit confused. Linksys used both VxWorks and Linux in
    the WRT54G. Revisions 1.0-4.0 used Linux, then they used VxWorks from
    5.0-8.0, then Linux in 8.1, then VxWorks in 8.2. So he is correct that
    they didn't exploit Linux in that model.

    However, when they found that many people were specifically seeking out
    the Linux models in order to install their own software on them, they
    introduced the WRT54GL, which was basically a 4.x version of the WRT54G.
    It was marketed as running Linux so you could hack it as a feature.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  5. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:37:27 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >
    > wrote
    > on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    > :
    >> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on
    >> 6/30/08 6:07 PM:
    >>
    >>
    >>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>
    >>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>
    >>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>
    >>> -RFH
    >>>

    >> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >
    > Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a Linux-based
    > router a little more, since I can readily get the source code for it --
    > but what does a router do? It routes. Could be Linux. Could be
    > Windows. Could be BSD. Could be a custom solution that is specific to
    > that router hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    > common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >
    > (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >
    >> set it and, for the most
    >> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very
    >> limited amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues
    >> become less important (though, obviously, still are important just not
    >> as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
    >>
    >>

    > The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.


    Dunno... Cisco still has CLI IOS...

    --
    Rick

  6. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    "The Ghost In The Machine" stated in post
    nbeoj5-cc5.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net on 6/30/08 6:37 PM:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >
    > wrote
    > on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    > :
    >> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >> 6:07 PM:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>
    >>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>
    >>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>
    >>> -RFH
    >>>

    >> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >
    > Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    > Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    > the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
    > routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    > Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    > hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    > common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >
    > (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)


    There are also sorts of special needs things that people might want... or,
    well, semi-special.

    Some examples: different types of logging and reporting of events (including
    live reports), packet blocking or re-routing based on complex rules, someone
    might want IP release and renewals to be automated based on time or events,
    rules might be changed based on time and user in rather complex ways, on and
    on... just a few things I can think of off hand. I am sure others can think
    of many more.

    >> set it and, for the most part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker
    >> there is a very limited amount of functionality you expect from a router...
    >> UI issues become less important (though, obviously, still are important just
    >> not as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
    >>

    > The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.


    Sure... but it could be customized and made much, much more flexible than my
    off-the-shelf general name brand router.

    --
    Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
    slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
    imagination. - attributed to Albert Einstein, likely apocryphal


  7. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit

    wrote
    on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:43:37 -0700
    :
    > "The Ghost In The Machine" stated in post
    > nbeoj5-cc5.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net on 6/30/08 6:37 PM:
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >> :
    >>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>
    >>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>
    >>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>
    >>>> -RFH
    >>>>
    >>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >>
    >> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
    >> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>
    >> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)

    >
    > There are also sorts of special needs things that people might want... or,
    > well, semi-special.
    >
    > Some examples: different types of logging and reporting of events (including
    > live reports), packet blocking or re-routing based on complex rules, someone
    > might want IP release and renewals to be automated based on time or events,
    > rules might be changed based on time and user in rather complex ways, on and
    > on... just a few things I can think of off hand. I am sure others can think
    > of many more.


    I for one would think that such reporting is best done elsewhere,
    after a logging box receives and processes event traps (SNMP).

    >
    >>> set it and, for the most part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker
    >>> there is a very limited amount of functionality you expect from a router...
    >>> UI issues become less important (though, obviously, still are important just
    >>> not as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
    >>>

    >> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.

    >
    > Sure... but it could be customized and made much, much more flexible than my
    > off-the-shelf general name brand router.
    >


    Aye, that it could. Of course the only one using that UI
    should be the network administrator, as it gets into the
    guts of the router (e.g., what ports are opened in the
    NAT firewall -- very dangerous in the wrong hands).

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Linux makes one use one's mind.
    Windows just messes with one's head.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  8. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    "The Ghost In The Machine" stated in post
    k8ooj5-us8.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net on 6/30/08 9:26 PM:

    ....
    >>>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
    >>>
    >>> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >>> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >>> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
    >>> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >>> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >>> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >>> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>>
    >>> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)

    >>
    >> There are also sorts of special needs things that people might want... or,
    >> well, semi-special.
    >>
    >> Some examples: different types of logging and reporting of events (including
    >> live reports), packet blocking or re-routing based on complex rules, someone
    >> might want IP release and renewals to be automated based on time or events,
    >> rules might be changed based on time and user in rather complex ways, on and
    >> on... just a few things I can think of off hand. I am sure others can think
    >> of many more.

    >
    > I for one would think that such reporting is best done elsewhere,
    > after a logging box receives and processes event traps (SNMP).


    Other might disagree. It allows for "choice". Hey! By saying that I do
    not have to defend why anyone would want that choice.

    >>>> set it and, for the most part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker
    >>>> there is a very limited amount of functionality you expect from a router...
    >>>> UI issues become less important (though, obviously, still are important
    >>>> just not as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
    >>>>
    >>> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
    >>>

    >> Sure... but it could be customized and made much, much more flexible than my
    >> off-the-shelf general name brand router.

    >
    > Aye, that it could. Of course the only one using that UI should be the
    > network administrator, as it gets into the guts of the router (e.g., what
    > ports are opened in the NAT firewall -- very dangerous in the wrong hands).


    Right... but the network administrator could very well be someone at home...
    not a trained pro necessarily. In most cases there is a reason to *not*
    have every single choice available for easy alteration. Hey, just like an
    OS.

    --
    When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
    When God changes your mind, that's faith.
    When facts change your mind, that's science.


  9. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > In article
    > ,
    > Ramon F Herrera wrote:
    >> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >> supplier Broadcom.
    >>
    >> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>
    >> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550

    >
    > That blogger is a bit confused. Linksys used both VxWorks and Linux in
    > the WRT54G. Revisions 1.0-4.0 used Linux, then they used VxWorks from
    > 5.0-8.0, then Linux in 8.1, then VxWorks in 8.2. So he is correct that
    > they didn't exploit Linux in that model.
    >
    > However, when they found that many people were specifically seeking out
    > the Linux models in order to install their own software on them, they
    > introduced the WRT54GL, which was basically a 4.x version of the WRT54G.
    > It was marketed as running Linux so you could hack it as a feature.


    Was that before or after Cisco acquired Linksys, though?

    --
    Armadillo:
    To provide weapons to a Spanish pickle.

  10. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >
    > wrote
    > on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >:
    >> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >> 6:07 PM:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>
    >>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>
    >>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>
    >>> -RFH
    >>>

    >> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >
    > Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    > Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    > the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It


    It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.

    As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    the rest of your physical network.

    Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly obvious.

    > routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    > Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    > hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    > common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >
    > (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >
    >> set it and, for the most
    >> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
    >> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
    >> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
    >> on a desktop computer).
    >>

    >
    > The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
    >


    Basically, a better appliance means you are less inclined to roll your own.

    --
    vi isn't easy to use. |||
    / | \
    vi is easy to REPLACE.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  11. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    JEDIDIAH writes:

    > On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>:
    >>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>
    >>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>
    >>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>
    >>>> -RFH
    >>>>
    >>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >>
    >> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >
    > It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.


    Somehow I think Ghost knows what a router is a lot better than you do.

    >
    > As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    > the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    > the rest of your physical network.


    So what? What has that to with whether the router runs Linux or a
    proprietary firmware?

    >
    > Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly obvious.
    >


    Please expand, unless, as usual, you're playing silly word games to make
    yourself appear informed about a blatantly obvious subject to most of
    the rest of is.

  12. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?


    "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    news:slrng6kckc.g6b.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    > On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine
    > wrote:
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>:
    >>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on
    >>> 6/30/08
    >>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>
    >>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>
    >>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>
    >>>> -RFH
    >>>>
    >>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >>
    >> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >
    > It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.
    >
    > As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    > the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    > the rest of your physical network.
    >
    > Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly
    > obvious.
    >
    >> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>
    >> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >>
    >>> set it and, for the most
    >>> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very
    >>> limited
    >>> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become
    >>> less
    >>> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as,
    >>> say,
    >>> on a desktop computer).
    >>>

    >>


    Are you sure that you're talking about a router and not a firewall?

    I realize that routers usually include firewall functionality but what
    you're talking about sounds more like the functionality of the firewall
    rather than the functionality provided by the router.

    - ss


    >> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
    >>

    >
    > Basically, a better appliance means you are less inclined to roll your
    > own.
    >
    > --
    > vi isn't easy to use. |||
    > / | \
    > vi is easy to REPLACE.
    >
    > Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    > ----------------------------------------------------------
    > http://www.usenet.com




  13. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On 2008-07-01, Hadron wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH writes:
    >
    >> On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>>
    >>> wrote
    >>> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>>:
    >>>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >>>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>>
    >>>>> -RFH
    >>>>>
    >>>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
    >>>
    >>> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >>> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >>> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >>
    >> It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.

    >
    > Somehow I think Ghost knows what a router is a lot better than you do.


    ....he also probably has a better grasp of English Exposition too.

    >
    >>
    >> As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    >> the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    >> the rest of your physical network.

    >
    > So what? What has that to with whether the router runs Linux or a
    > proprietary firmware?


    You can't adapt proprietary firmware. I suspect that Ghost wouldn't
    need that bit spelled out for him as if he were a 2 year old.

    >
    >>
    >> Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly obvious.
    >>

    >
    > Please expand, unless, as usual, you're playing silly word games to make
    > yourself appear informed about a blatantly obvious subject to most of
    > the rest of is.


    Why bother? You've already told me that my primary audience is well informed.

    If you were more literate perhaps you would complain about "word games" less.
    You sound like some old woman that immigrated when she was middle aged and
    never quite fully mastered her newly adopted language.

    --
    vi isn't easy to use. |||
    / | \
    vi is easy to REPLACE.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  14. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:42:39 +0200, Hadron wrote:


    > Please expand, unless, as usual, you're playing silly word games to make
    > yourself appear informed about a blatantly obvious subject to most of
    > the rest of is.


    Jebbediah talks like that crazy professor in the old made for TV Superman
    series with Jim Reeve.
    IOW in rhymes and riddles.

    I think his name is Professor Pepper-winkle or something like that.

    Crook: "What will the kyrptonite do to Superman"
    Professor: "It will kill him" "Kill him it will".

    and so forth...

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    "Subway steel" stated in post
    486a36b4$0$25953$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org on 7/1/08 6:52 AM:

    >
    > "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    > news:slrng6kckc.g6b.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >> On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine
    >> wrote:
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>>
    >>> wrote
    >>> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>> :
    >>>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on
    >>>> 6/30/08
    >>>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>>
    >>>>> -RFH
    >>>>>
    >>>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
    >>>
    >>> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >>> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >>> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >>
    >> It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.
    >>
    >> As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    >> the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    >> the rest of your physical network.
    >>
    >> Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly
    >> obvious.
    >>
    >>> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >>> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >>> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >>> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>>
    >>> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >>>
    >>>> set it and, for the most
    >>>> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very
    >>>> limited
    >>>> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become
    >>>> less
    >>>> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as,
    >>>> say,
    >>>> on a desktop computer).
    >>>>
    >>>

    >
    > Are you sure that you're talking about a router and not a firewall?
    >
    > I realize that routers usually include firewall functionality but what
    > you're talking about sounds more like the functionality of the firewall
    > rather than the functionality provided by the router.


    In the context of the discussion - OSS for a router - one can assume a
    Firewall would almost surely be included.


    --
    The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem of
    limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small children and
    great nations. - David Friedman


  16. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On 2008-07-01, Subway steel wrote:
    >
    > "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    > news:slrng6kckc.g6b.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >> On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine
    >> wrote:
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>>
    >>> wrote
    >>> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>>:
    >>>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on
    >>>> 6/30/08
    >>>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>>
    >>>>> -RFH
    >>>>>
    >>>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
    >>>
    >>> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >>> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >>> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >>
    >> It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.
    >>
    >> As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    >> the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    >> the rest of your physical network.
    >>
    >> Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly
    >> obvious.
    >>
    >>> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >>> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >>> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >>> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>>
    >>> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >>>
    >>>> set it and, for the most
    >>>> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very
    >>>> limited
    >>>> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become
    >>>> less
    >>>> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as,
    >>>> say,
    >>>> on a desktop computer).
    >>>>
    >>>

    >
    > Are you sure that you're talking about a router and not a firewall?


    The only real difference is the software it's running. The fact
    that a router anymore is just a specialized PC of sorts has caused
    that line to blur considerably.

    Does Cisco even sell "real routers" anymore (running IOS or whatnot)
    that don't have some sort of firewall capacity?

    >
    > I realize that routers usually include firewall functionality but what
    > you're talking about sounds more like the functionality of the firewall
    > rather than the functionality provided by the router.


    I'm talking about what the hardware can do because it's overpowered
    and sits on the physical boundary between networks. If it can run
    something like snort then let it.

    [deletia]

    --

    iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  17. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:00:54 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:42:39 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Please expand, unless, as usual, you're playing silly word games to
    >> make yourself appear informed about a blatantly obvious subject to most
    >> of the rest of is.

    >
    > Jebbediah talks like that crazy professor in the old made for TV
    > Superman series with Jim Reeve.


    What Superman show with Jim Reeve?

    > IOW in rhymes and riddles.
    >
    > I think his name is Professor Pepper-winkle or something like that.
    >
    > Crook: "What will the kyrptonite do to Superman" Professor: "It will
    > kill him" "Kill him it will".
    >
    > and so forth...


    --
    Rick

  18. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    JEDIDIAH writes:
    >> Are you sure that you're talking about a router and not a firewall?


    > The only real difference is the software it's running. The fact
    >that a router anymore is just a specialized PC of sorts has caused
    >that line to blur considerably.


    This is only true for the lowest end cisco devices. Most midrange and
    highend routers have lots of ASIC gear in them to do lots of nice things.

    Even most firewalls have lots of ASICs in them to get the throughput.
    A pure CPU based router/firewall is only the most basic, slowest box
    in cisco/juniper's product line.

    > Does Cisco even sell "real routers" anymore (running IOS or whatnot)
    >that don't have some sort of firewall capacity?


    Define firewall. Even the most basic low-end cisco has always had ACLs
    going way way back in history.
    But you do have to license the stateful inspection FW feature.

  19. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    In article ,
    Rick wrote:
    >On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:00:54 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> ...
    >> Jebbediah talks like that crazy professor in the old made for TV
    >> Superman series with Jim Reeve.

    >
    >What Superman show with Jim Reeve?


    He spelled George Reeves incorrectly.

    --
    -- Rod --
    rodd(at)polylogics(dot)com

  20. Re: Is there a market for an open source router?

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, JEDIDIAH

    wrote
    on Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:35:08 -0500
    :
    > On 2008-07-01, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
    >>:
    >>> "Ramon F Herrera" stated in post
    >>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4...oglegroups.com on 6/30/08
    >>> 6:07 PM:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
    >>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
    >>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
    >>>> supplier Broadcom.
    >>>>
    >>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
    >>>>
    >>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
    >>>>
    >>>> -RFH
    >>>>
    >>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...

    >>
    >> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
    >> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
    >> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It

    >
    > It's a gatekeeper for your physical network.


    Maybe at the circuit layer.
    The actual gatekeeper is a laminated door. :-P

    >
    > As such, there's a lot of traffic that can be blocked at
    > the gateway that doesn't need to ever make it's way into
    > the rest of your physical network.


    True.

    >
    > Ethernet is a broadcast medium, so the advantage of this is blatantly obvious.


    Not any more it's not. Look up "hub" versus "switch";
    the switch makes it point-to-point. A little odd, I know,
    and I frankly don't know exactly what it does in there but
    I suspect switches are now vulnerable to the teardrop IP
    fragmentation attack, whereas hubs were not.

    Of course switches are also more efficient. ;-)

    >
    >> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
    >> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
    >> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
    >> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
    >>
    >> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
    >>
    >>> set it and, for the most
    >>> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
    >>> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
    >>> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
    >>> on a desktop computer).
    >>>

    >>
    >> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
    >>

    >
    > Basically, a better appliance means you are less inclined to roll your own.
    >


    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows Vista. It'll Fix Everything(tm).
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast