| reply to peaches28
Re: Sveasoft's vs WiFi-Box peaches:
You misrepresent somewhat then. Come on, an "enterprise" box does not fit in the internet backbone, nor are they expected to "cope with 100,000 prefixes at a minimum and forward a few OC-3's traffic rate at the same time." You are talking about core carrier class equipment here, and surely nobody ever suggested my $75 WRT54G was going there. 
I think both OSPF and BGP are good, plausible additions, and here's why:
OSPF: is good for more than just handling large numbers of routes. I wouldn't expect this box to be a core router for any but the simplest networks (of which about 0% need ANY routing protocol), but it might serve nicely as an edgish device that needs to participate to learn routes. Oh, and FYI, it's rarely ever the case that *receiving* a lot of LSAs kills an OSPF implementation. Usually it's the SPF calcs and the LSA flooding/retrans that does.
BGP: Sure, it's used on the internet, but that's not the only place. It's also used quite a bit in small enterprise scenarios with a few fully or partially meshed remote offices. I think this device would be great for this kind of application since there probably isn't very much traffic or very many routes, just the need to peer with other small sites.
Anyway, sorry for (yet another) derail |
|
| reply to jazzman916
said by jazzman916:
agree. Let's please get back to the topic as the thread starter intended comparing Sveasoft's to WiFi-Box firmware.
Thanks,
Jazz
Is not the release of source (and the ability to further modify the base) a valid comparison between firmwares?
seems rather on topic to me - although I do realise this can be a touchy issue for some.
--
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.-- Mark Twain |
|
gojeda
join:2002-12-15
Pompano Beach, FL | It is a valid comparison point, but it has been spoken about way too much and, in the end, is political and "non-technical". Back to the topic please. |
|
| said by gojeda:
It is a valid comparison point, but it has been spoken about way too much and, in the end, is political and "non-technical". Back to the topic please.
It's technical in the sense that I can get seavasofts version and add or remove bits as i see fit, because they release source.
I cannot do this with Wifi's firmwares (yet anyway), and this is disappointing because Wifi's feature base better fits what I want to do, although there are a few things I'd change for my personal use.
--
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.-- Mark Twain |
|
medici
join:2001-02-22
Shohola, PA | reply to Roop
i agree with peaches. i don't care. i'm greatful to have wifi's
software running on my router.
First of all, this is not a flame of WI-FI or Peaches. However, Peaches, you obviously DO CARE. You are running WI-FI's code in your router, and this would never have been possible if LinkSys wasn't pressured to release their code under the terms of GPL.
What applies to LinkSys also applies to Wi-Fi (and SVEA, etc...). I see (and have visited) Wi-Fi's project page on SourceForge. I understand that Wi-Fi wants to do this "the right way." The entire project is young and evolving at a rapid pace.
My personal preference would be to post the source right along with the binaries, and then move the code into SourceForge as time permits. That would end all the complaints and, I think, increase acceptance of the firmware. |
|
| omg and i though the complaints from ALL (well about 2 people) had finished. Wifi is aware he has to post his source. he has a very limited connection. it will be uploaded no doubt but to when is a different matter
--
Regards, Simon
»wrt54g.sonycrx2xx.org |
|
 AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ | reply to Reign
this isn't fair,
I was going to defend wi-fi box, and i didn't because the moderator requested an end to the discussion. However, there are posts critical to wi-fi box (some even claim his release is 'illegal'),
in fairness to wi-fi box, either allow the discussion, or delete all posts wether pro or con about the legality, suitability or ethics of the software vis-a-vi the GPL/source code issue. |
|
 jdepewJames DepewPremium,VIP
join:2002-05-13
Savannah, GA | Alright everyone, now the discussion can finally return to the original topic of feature/implementation differences.
WiFi has released the source code for his latest release 2.02.2.1pre at »sourceforge.net/projects/wifi-box/
We are aiming to post the source code from previous versions as well. You have to understand that WiFi need 6 hours to upload the 75MB source .zip file. The other source releases will be made as quickly as possible without putting a huge dent in the development cycle of the new firmware while bugs/features are being addressed.
Again, thank you, and now back to your regularly scheduled topic.
--
Comcast-}WRT54Gv1-}BEFSR41v2&BEFSR81wired-} K6-550, XP2800+, PIII-S 1.4, Slimp3, XBoxwireless-}Toshiba S1292, iPAQ h2215, WPS54GU2 w/ Brother HL-1440 |
|
 jazzman916Life on the UpbeatPremium,MVM,ExMod 2004-10
join:2001-09-01
Birdland | reply to AVD
said by AVD:
in fairness to wi-fi box, either allow the discussion, or delete all posts wether pro or con about the legality, suitability or ethics of the software vis-a-vi the GPL/source code issue.
Start your own thread if that is the topic you want to discuss. However, flames of either should be avoided.
Thanks,
Jazz
--
| Tweak it | Secure it | Network it | Crunch with it | Crunch more with it | |
|
|
|
| reply to PorkRind
said by PorkRind:
The availability of Sveasoft's source is certainly a feature that will be important to some, and is thus an advantage of that firmware release. The relative features of each firmware release were, after all, the subject of this thread.
The facts are there. Make your own decisions.
the fact is Sveasoft didn't release the code until I asked wether the source codes were going to be released. I ask this question in these forums.
so both authors were both in breach of the licensing as they had previous firmware released without the source code. (wifi AND Sveasoft)
both authors have now release the source code so can we now get off this band wagon as start talking about real issues like adding features and bug fixes etc!
--
Regards, Simon
»wrt54g.sonycrx2xx.org |
|
| reply to biffo
I guess you don't deal with many large enterprise then biffo. Ever heard of a border router and bgp multi-homing? Not only that but most large enterprise use carrier class equipment in their network backbones. Sure I overshot quite a bit and I said so to Sveasoft, (I guess you did not see that.) but put it this way we disagree. OSPF would only be good on these little boxes if you keep the prefix count low, such as a little stub/edge router. I don't care about the router make, 16MB is not much RAM. A moderate amount of route prefixes needs more RAM to be comfortable. I am glad that you know the SPF/flooding process that are CPU intensive tasks.(Duh!)
BGP is only used for certain things, and it is for sure that it is not used as a small enterprise IGP route proccess.(If you use it for that, you are being a little weird.) I would only uses BGP internally if my number of routes would not play nicely within my IGP, my moderate/large sized network was not summarized, or I ran something like MPLS VPN. Now the cool factor of running it is large because hey, it is what runs the internet route table! |
|
| reply to medici
I thought this was over.
But medici, you need to finish reading everything before you post. I later said that posting the Source is not the issue. I just thought that folks were beating the GPL drum in here quite loudly and for no reason. Linux started as a grass roots kind of thing, and so is this little WRT54G firmware. These are people doing this for fun. If they were not aware of the legal responsibilities by now I am sure they are as several of you have made quite clear. But remember, if you work your ass off at work, come home and tinker with a little router on your spare time, post that result on the web for others, and all you hear are bitching about timeliness of you publishing your source? How would you feel? Hell the guys both Svea and WiFi have real jobs, maybe they posted when they had time! You know busy, have another life? It is very easy to complain about something, but who gives anyone the right to complain about something that they have not contributed to or given up some of their lives to create the very thing that is being complained about. Have you or any of you other folks who have been harping about GPL helped create anything Open Source, I doubt it very much. Just a lot of bitching and no cause for it. |
|
jazzman916Life on the UpbeatPremium,MVM,ExMod 2004-10
join:2001-09-01
Birdland | said by peaches28:
I thought this was over.
 |
|
