|
Posted by Ramon F Herrera on June 30, 2008, 9:07 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
"While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
supplier Broadcom.
Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
-RFH
|
|
Posted by Snit on June 30, 2008, 9:14 pm
a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com on 6/30/08
6:07 PM:
>
> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
> supplier Broadcom.
>
> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
>
> -RFH
>
That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine... set it and, for the most
part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
on a desktop computer).
--
"Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/gates/>
|
|
Posted by The Ghost In The Machine on June 30, 2008, 9:37 pm
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
wrote
on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com on 6/30/08
> 6:07 PM:
>
>>
>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
>> supplier Broadcom.
>>
>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
>>
>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
>>
>> -RFH
>>
> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
common anyway, making a software solution practical.
(Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
> set it and, for the most
> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very limited
> amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues become less
> important (though, obviously, still are important just not as much as, say,
> on a desktop computer).
>
The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #889123:
std::vector<...> v; for(int i = 0; i < v.size(); i++) v.erase(v.begin() + i);
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
|
|
Posted by Rick on June 30, 2008, 10:03 pm
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:37:27 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
> wrote
> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com on
>> 6/30/08 6:07 PM:
>>
>>
>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
>>> supplier Broadcom.
>>>
>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
>>>
>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
>>>
>>> -RFH
>>>
>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
>
> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a Linux-based
> router a little more, since I can readily get the source code for it --
> but what does a router do? It routes. Could be Linux. Could be
> Windows. Could be BSD. Could be a custom solution that is specific to
> that router hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
>
> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
>
>> set it and, for the most
>> part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker there is a very
>> limited amount of functionality you expect from a router... UI issues
>> become less important (though, obviously, still are important just not
>> as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
>>
>>
> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
Dunno... Cisco still has CLI IOS...
--
Rick
|
|
Posted by Snit on June 30, 2008, 10:43 pm
nbeoj5-cc5.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net on 6/30/08 6:37 PM:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit
> wrote
> on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:14:34 -0700
>> a1bb0bfb-07ef-4d67-bef5-2f82875b2dd4@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com on 6/30/08
>> 6:07 PM:
>>
>>>
>>> "While Cisco accidentally created an open source router a few years
>>> ago, getting caught with Linux in its Linksys, the company never
>>> exploited this as a feature, but treated it as a bug, blaming chip
>>> supplier Broadcom.
>>>
>>> Netgear is definitely treating this as a feature."
>>>
>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2612&tag=nl.e550
>>>
>>> -RFH
>>>
>> That is an area where Linux and OSS should shine...
>
> Why? A router's a router. Granted, I'd probably trust a
> Linux-based router a little more, since I can readily get
> the source code for it -- but what does a router do? It
> routes. Could be Linux. Could be Windows. Could be BSD.
> Could be a custom solution that is specific to that router
> hardware, though nowadays microprocessors are extremely
> common anyway, making a software solution practical.
>
> (Also problematic if there's a bug therein.)
There are also sorts of special needs things that people might want... or,
well, semi-special. :)
Some examples: different types of logging and reporting of events (including
live reports), packet blocking or re-routing based on complex rules, someone
might want IP release and renewals to be automated based on time or events,
rules might be changed based on time and user in rather complex ways, on and
on... just a few things I can think of off hand. I am sure others can think
of many more.
>> set it and, for the most part, forget it... or even when you have to tinker
>> there is a very limited amount of functionality you expect from a router...
>> UI issues become less important (though, obviously, still are important just
>> not as much as, say, on a desktop computer).
>>
> The standard "router UI" nowadays would probably be web-based.
Sure... but it could be customized and made much, much more flexible than my
off-the-shelf general name brand router.
--
Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
imagination. - attributed to Albert Einstein, likely apocryphal
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Open Source Network Management | March 29, 2006, 1:13 pm |
| Open source network management application similar to CiscoWorks | June 30, 2006, 4:59 pm |
| how to open a port on a Cisco 1800 series router | February 19, 2008, 9:02 am |
| Data Recovery SOURCE CODE ( SOURCE CODES of Professional Data Recovery Software ) | December 29, 2004, 9:03 am |
| Cisco owned (linksys wet11b) is cisco failing to see market demands? | March 10, 2005, 10:02 pm |
| Source Group | January 4, 2006, 1:36 am |
| ....source based pbr + bgp? | January 30, 2006, 5:59 pm |
| bgp source routing | February 22, 2006, 8:12 am |
| Source and destination NAT | June 25, 2007, 11:20 pm |
| source nat in pix 506 for vpn clients | March 21, 2008, 9:27 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map