Re: Fwd: Re: Linksys WRT54G with freebsd

On 9/23/05, Scott Long <scottl_at_samsco.org> wrote:
> Bruno Ducrot wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 01:50:45PM +0200, Florent Thoumie wrote:
> >
> >>Le Vendredi 23 septembre 2005 à 12:16 +0200, Bachilo Dmitry a écrit :
> >>
> >>>Forwarding to FreeBSD hackers. (Because i am hacking WRT right now and only
> >>>Linux flashes work)
> >>>----------  ?????????????????????? ??????????????????  ----------
> >>>
> >>>Subject: Re: Linksys WRT54G with freebsd
> >>>Date: ?????????????? 23 ???????????????? 2005 17:06
> >>>From: Thierry Herbelot <thierry_at_herbelot.com>
> >>>To: freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org
> >>>Cc: "Marcos Biscaysaqu - ThePacific.net" <marcos_at_thepacific.net>
> >>>
> >>>Le Friday 23 September 2005 11:08, vous avez écrit :
> >>>
> >>>>On the other hand, it's the wireless thing.  If not needed, this
> >>>>should  be fun to do a port, somehow, even though it's a wireless
> >>>>router.
> >>>
> >>>The "cool factor" of porting FreeBSD to the WRT54G cannot be underestimated,
> >>>but Linux ports were enormously helped by the opening of the sources of the
> >>>Linksys Linux port (which is absent for FreeBSD) and the big number of
> >>>willing developpers (just have a look at the *number* of different Linux
> >>>ports to the WRT).
> >>>
> >>>The latest 6.0 release would be an excellent target, with its brand-new
> >>>support for WPA and virtual APs ... who volunteers ?
> >>
> >>      The Linksys WRT54g wireless router is based on a Broadcom CPU
> >>      (derived from MIPS) and FreeBSD/mips seems to be a dead
> >>      project :-(
> >
> >
> > Indeed.  It's targeted to SGI platforms anyway.  Maybe there is a need to
> > start a new port if there is enough people interrested?
> >
>
> There has been talk of doing this in the past year from some people, but
> I don't know if it got very far.  If you're inspired, go for it!  There
> are plenty of docs on the web about how to attach a serial port header
> and bootstrap it.  And, don't underestimate the mips32 work that is
> already in the tree; it's likely a good starting point.
>
> And, it's more than just a 'coolness' factor.  I'd really like to have
> pf running on mine, that way I could rid of the clunky machine doing
> static NAT + firewall on my DSL line.
>
> Scott

m0n0wall or it's version on steroids pfsense would be real cool to
have on a WRT54g 8)

>THe linux firewall capabilities are soooooo last century =-)
Except for some nice projects/patches that do Layer 7 and allow
filtering or queueing on specific traffic. ALTQ applied to marked
packets would be lovely :)
This would be very nice to have, except everyone (Daniel Hartmeier
included) tells it's a bad ideia to have protocol inspection at the
firewall level.... well, going off topic but couldn't resist ;)

--
Joao Barros