Topic 'Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense' in forum 'Wireless Service Providers' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760356 en Sun, 19 May 2013 00:22:54 EDT Sun, 19 May 2013 00:22:54 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22826836 said by superdog See ProfileEveryone keeps repeating this, and I understand why to some extent. Am I not correct in stating that FreeBSD is a branch of, or was taken from Linux kernel?.
Nope. FreeBSD is based on BSD UNIX. It is not derived in any way from Linux (which is a good thing, because if it were, it would be covered by Linux' license, which is hostile to professional software developers).

Linux, on the other hand, has borrowed code from BSD. If you look through the source code of any Linux distribution, you will find files with the Berkeley copyright notice in them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22826836 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:12:57 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22795211 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22795211 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:36:37 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794789 said by AMD Phreak:

FreeBSD came from AT&T Unix.....
No, FreeBSD is directly derived from 386BSD and 4.4BSD. FreeBSD is a true Unix environment.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794789 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:26:13 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794436 said by superdog:

said by SuperWISP:

Neither m0n0wall nor pfsense is Linux-based. Both are based on FreeBSD, which is more secure and more stable.
Everyone keeps repeating this, and I understand why to some extent. Am I not correct in stating that FreeBSD is a branch of, or was taken from Linux kernel?.
FreeBSD came from AT&T Unix.....
--
"No job is so important, and no service is so urgent that we cannot take the time to perform our work safely."
-- AT&T, Your World, Destroyed.
--Safety One Tower Rescue Certified
--LLigetfa:"Wimax is like teenage sex. Everyone talks about doing it."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794436 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:26:06 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794389 said by SuperWISP:

Neither m0n0wall nor pfsense is Linux-based. Both are based on FreeBSD, which is more secure and more stable.
Everyone keeps repeating this, and I understand why to some extent. Am I not correct in stating that FreeBSD is a branch of, or was taken from Linux kernel?.
--
»www.wavecrazy.net
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794389 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:16:41 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794053 said by thewisperer:

correct me if I am wrong but the next version of pfsense will

provide layer 7 qos and that should set it apart from a few others.
I'll believe it when I see it.. l7 is tricky and always changing.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22794053 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:12:22 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790752
provide layer 7 qos and that should set it apart from a few others.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790752 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:10:04 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790539 that you run that can eat up resources
NTOP for example seems to slow things down a bit]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790539 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:27:19 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790329 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22790329 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:44:45 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22788517
I do want to try out pfsense just heard it is a dog for resources.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22788517 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:28:50 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22787800 said by smeghead:

We run M0n0 on a wrap board and a small enclosure for cheap.. instead of needing a real PC for PFsense..
I run m0n0 on a wrap board also. Very nice small form factor.

I'm guessing I have been using m0n0 for that last 3 years. It just keeps humming along...No problems. I love it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22787800 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 06:43:03 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22785703 new hardware soon ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22785703 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:42:37 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22783647 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22783647 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:10:43 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22783272 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22783272 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:02:06 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22768796 said by superdog:

Which one is better, and why?. They are both linux based and do about the same thing, right? FYI neither of them use Linux ... BSD folks are quite sensitive on that point. ;)

m0n0wall started long ago with an older "minimized" BSD variation which had no Atheros support and few extra modules. pfSense started with later BSD with Atheros support and many extra modules.

Somewhat different philosophy for firewall and traffic shaping since m0n0wall uses ipfw+dummynet while
pfSense uses PF+ALTQ . Some shaping scenarios can only be done in m0n0wall and it uses less resources, so many people live with its other limitations. :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22768796 Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:54:49 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760883
m0n0 is much more lightweight. It is based on an older BSD Kernel so performance on my old Thin cilent P233 means I can shape a 20mbps line with the "magic shaper wizard" (plus some tweaks) and it does quite well.

pFsense however more is up-to-date, and has a "kitchen sink" worth of features. It takes a bit more horsepower to run (but and old P3-600 is plenty) and has tons of useful extra features: UPnP support, multi-wan load balancing, better traffic shaping, etc. But the biggest feature I would say is the "plugins". NTOP and SQUID are two popular plugins, but heck you can use just about any FreeBSD package too so if you want OSPF you just add it in ... lets just say pF rocks!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760883 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:22:39 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760853 Both are based off Free BSD not linux
but share some similarities
I prefer PF as it is more feature rich and always seems to have some kewl addons available or in active development

Nice gui and has been 100% rock solid for me
--
Best Regards

MD]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760853 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:16:12 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760721 said by superdog:

Which one is better, and why?. They are both linux based and do about the same thing, right?
No they are freebsd based, and hence use ipfw instead of iptables.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760721 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:50:16 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760618 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760618 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:32:44 EDT Re: M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760551 1) Captive portal/firewall. very easy to establish who gets through by either static IP and or DHCP with allowed MAC either by IP assignment or pass through.
2) real-time traffic graph
3) traffic shaper which limits the download and upload speeds.
4)PPPoE authentication for my bandwidth instead of having my modem do it. My modem is set to Bridge mode.

PFSense:
this is used by one of my friends who introduced me to m0n0wall. He has two sources of bandwidth and it does load balancing.

One source is primary the other secondary...
he balances 1:3 as the primary smaller but more reliable...

he uses the m0n0wall exactly as I do.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760551 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:19:41 EDT M0n0wall VS PFSense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760356 --
»www.wavecrazy.net
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/M0n0wall-VS-PFSense-22760356 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:44:04 EDT