Lynn so many thoughts I hope I can cope....
guitarlynn wrote the following at 06:34 18.09.2002: > > >So ... the key word in Erich's comment is "primitive". If one's ends > > > are simple, LEAF setup requirements probably are too demanding. But > > > complex needs require complex solutions, and that is what all the > > > LEAF and related-project (Shorewall, for example) developers seem > > > interested in supporting. > > > > > >Yes, the existence of multiple LEAF branches does complicate things > > > a bit, but blaming this diversity for the greater complexity of > > > LEAF misses a lot of the point ... that LEAF configuration is more > > > complicated than router-in-a-box solutions precisely because it can > > > do more complicated things. > >Ok, with this line in thought being pointed out. In less than a week, >I can presently turn out a set of custom images of several present LEAF >variants that: > >1) Provides a general firewall. >2) Provides a web-based interface linked to internal ip's w/ virtually >no security (other than name/password). >3) Is simple to setup due to lack of configuration options. > >Is this what you desire to have available??? I feel that several others >in the past have likely come this far in development, but feel the need >not to release it due to the massive amount of specific request for more >rarely needed options that don't necessarily keep everything simple >(or on a floppy). Personally, I feel the upcoming development with the >"web-based configuration" thread would be preferrable in the long run. I believe this will be a great thing and certainly the one most visible to the end user. > > Lots of people in the team have done little (or even big) extensions > > to the base threads. Some of these externsions may have found their > > way into the distribution. I would like to see a distribution tree > > with sources included, embracing as much additional stuff as is seen > > fit by the lead developers and I am prepared to help where I can with > > as much time as I can pry loose. I believe the community can profit > > from such a model and who knows, maybe we have success. I believe > > Ewald has expressed his dedication too and certainly others may want > > to get involved. > > > > If you think this is too big a bite for anyone's appetite let me > > know. > >Building a type of "ports" system such as David is working on interests >me tremendously, however after several short precursive peeks at his >tree leaves me with several inpending questions: > >Is the target system compiling the source itself? That would probably be difficult, but who knows, maybe it is possible to start with a little floppy image and then load the necessary components for a compile to the target system. >1) If so, what compiler is available on the target system (floppy?)? > >2) If the target system is not compiling the code, the user must use >some form of *NIX system to compile on.... this pretty much eliminates >M$ users. There is one thing almost sure, pure M$ users will hardly want to compile a firewall, they want a mostly preconfigured thing. I wonder if on a build system one could select various components which could be just put together to form a functional firewall. I believe most of the stuff exists in the form of .lrp packages, but some match better and some less. I believe it is worth to put some effort there and this IMHO leads to a common software tree. >3) if the compilation is done by the system remotely, is the >SF compile farm (or some other system) going to work with any >GPL restrictions (distributing binaries?). No idea, this is certainly worth some consideration. >These are simply concerns due to my lack of understanding of >"port" systems outside of LFS, which requires a Linux compiler >on the host system. A simple description of the process being >proposed would likely build more dialog on the topic. Any direction >this is taken is going to have a baseline environment, which will >affect the required licensing or end-user in some way. I'm still >attempting to figure out what the required system can/will be. > >Thanks for the thoughts, the effort, and the development! The same. Erich THINK P�ntenstrasse 39 8143 Stallikon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint: BC9A 25BC 3954 3BC8 C024 8D8A B7D4 FF9D 05B8 0A16 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts on Hammer Technology! Open Source & Linux Developers, register now for the AMD Developer Symposium. Code: EX8664 http://www.developwithamd.com/developerlab _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
