As the others have said, it depends on what you mean by 'integrate'
Ignoring the lack of Xen dom0 support in FreeBSD for a moment.
Utilising VT technology to deliver physical as well as logical isolation of
multiple concurrent PFSense instances in a manner analagous to
Fortinet VDOM :
Ignoring the lack of Xen dom0 support in FreeBSD for a moment, of course.
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:13 AM, pfsense sense pfse...@kavadas.org wrote:
multiple concurrent PFSense instances
no, you have also missed my point... i'm not interested in vistualizing
pfsense
my idea was to provide
I think he understood, but was suggesting other virtualization ideas that he
felt would be a more rewarding use of developer resources. To me, it sounds
like you want the feature set of pfsense available on a platform that runs
virtual machines... for example, having a pfSense option in
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 15:31, pfsense sense pfse...@kavadas.org wrote:
Ignoring the lack of Xen dom0 support in FreeBSD for a moment, of course.
I definitely misunderstood your original post, my apologies. That
being said, there isn't and doesn't soon look to be much motion within
FreeBSD to
point taken but it wouldn't be adding [file | virtual | foo] server
features it would only be pfsense -- VT
i'm no security expert, in any stretch of the imagination, I would have
expected that the suggested addition of a dom0 would/could be fully
protected, due to dom0 sitting behind pfsense,
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 16:19, pfsense sense pfse...@kavadas.org wrote:
point taken but it wouldn't be adding [file | virtual | foo] server
features it would only be pfsense -- VT
i'm no security expert, in any stretch of the imagination, I would have
expected that the suggested addition of a
