Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-02-02 Thread DarkFoon
plenty of other things to work on that I am better at for the time-being. His firewall solution for now does it's job. Anthony - Original Message - From: "Rainer Duffner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 4:03 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion]

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-02-01 Thread Rainer Duffner
DarkFoon wrote: Hmm. You have talked a little over my head... (I do not know what dot1q trunking is, and I have a vague memory of what layer 2 is... *eep*) Anyways an individual broadcast domain per segment. Maybe that is what he wants and/or I'm overlooking something. I don't think

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-02-01 Thread DarkFoon
g, do the barebones appliances have gigabit ethernet? Or is that feature usually rare? Anthony - Original Message - From: "Nick Buraglio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 12:43 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh > The netscreens are n

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-02-01 Thread Nick Buraglio
The netscreens are not too bad, I have experience with the ns5400's and the little ns5gt. They have a decent gui but the cli is a little unintuitive until you get used to it. They start getting pretty pricey when you start adding interfaces too. As a different approach you could always

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-02-01 Thread Rainer Duffner
DarkFoon wrote: APPLIANCE! That's the word I was looking for! Thank you! Yes, my client my client means what you said: an appliance, which is "plug, go to web interface, click, click, click and it works". He has one of those (appliance) already, but like I said, its some piece of crap

AW: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-01-31 Thread Holger Bauer
oops: you can access the bios at the front com port, not usb. sorry for confusion ;-) > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Holger Bauer > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 1. Februar 2006 08:24 > An: discussion@pfsense.com > Betreff: AW: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh > &

AW: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-01-31 Thread Holger Bauer
ssion@pfsense.com > Betreff: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh > > > Quoting DarkFoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > and Secondly, does anybody know of any "hardware" > firewall/routers (man, I'm > > tired of typing that) that have the abov

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-01-31 Thread DarkFoon
PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh > Quoting DarkFoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > and Secondly, does anybody know of any "hardware" firewall/routers (man, I'm > > tired of typing that) tha

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-01-31 Thread Dmitry Sorokin
Quoting DarkFoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > and Secondly, does anybody know of any "hardware" firewall/routers (man, I'm > tired of typing that) that have the above features? > > I'm not trying to snub pfSense; I'd love to use it, but I can't convince him > (well, possibly, but he wants me to first l

[pfSense-discussion] Clients... ugh

2006-01-31 Thread DarkFoon
I've got a client who has asked me (among other things) to make him a router/firewall. Currently he has a "hardware" firewall/router but I told him that it doesn't support the features he wants. I attempted to pursuade him to use pfSense, but he would rather have a "hardware" (meaning linksy