YFW Not enough bsd providers

jeromeza

@silvenga

For one as a firewall.

PF is by far superior to anything Linux can offer in this regard.

Take a look at something like PFSense for an idea.

Maounique

Actually, it depends. I have run pfsense on a lot of things and it simply hangs in certain conditions and cpus, uses more cpu for similar tasks and has lower throughput on similar hardware.
I agree it is great, from what I saw, stable and all, but I do like small firewalls that have high throughput, so, while I do use pfsense a lot when stability is needed and the cpu is intel, I dont use it in small setups, which need a lot of pps/throughput.
Bottom of line, to each his own, isn't it great to have so much choice?

blergh_

as far as BSD/freebsd/openbsd goes we offer this as an optional ISO during sign-up, KVM-based in Germany.

iceTwy

@Maounique said:
Experience simply shows BSD and especially OpenBSD which is also OS, are among the safest OSes out there.

BSD distro developers are pretty reactive when it comes to fixing security flaws, and, anyway, most BSD-based distros have a strong focus on security (e.g. crypto or LibreSSL). I guess that it takes a bit more to dive into BSD than into Linux these days, but it's still nice to have BSD distros around just for security purposes.

duckeeyuck

blergh_ said: Do note that i agreed to some extent with the points you made initially, i wasn't criticizing. I simply asked/wondered if it was something that you actually need or if it was simply something you'd like to see more of. Are you looking for jails? bhive?

jails

raindog308

Silvenga said: The GNU licence promotes true freedom while BSD can stay closed and proprietary (HP Unix)

WTF are you talking about?

The BSD license is more open and free than the GNU GPL. Also, what is "HP Unix"? Do you mean HP-UX? Why would you pick that one vs. Solaris, AIX, or any other proprietary Unix?

You do not understand the difference between GPL, BSD, and proprietary licenses.

Silvenga said: Because of the GNU licence on all derivatives of Linux we see more code review

You need to google "OpenBSD" before you make sure foolish statements about code review.

Silvenga said: The Linux kernel is in active development by thousands of users and rich companies - hence we see much better portability of Linux than BSD.

You need to google "NetBSD" before you make sure foolish statements about portability.

I would never say that *BSD is the best choice over Linux for all cases. I personally use Linux. But you are amazingly ignorant about things you're spouting.

Silvenga said: Linux will always be 100% binary compatible across distributions

This is not true today - and I want your crystal ball!

Silvenga said: Please help me understand your favor of using Unix.

Here is your homework: go research why *BSD is, as you claim, "closed and proprietary". Then come back here, open a thread, and defend your thesis.

Sigh...for-profit school students...

rm_

raindog308 said: The BSD license is more open and free than the GNU GPL.

"Open" to exploitation of your efforts by greedy corporations without giving anything back, and "free" to incorporate whatever you create into their restrictive proprietary products to sell back to you.

raindog308

True, but still open. Not "closed and proprietary".

duckeeyuck

rm_ said: "Open" to exploitation of your efforts by greedy corporations without giving anything back, and "free" to incorporate whatever you create into their restrictive proprietary products to sell back to you.

It's relative.