[IPCop-devel] Re: IPCop future -- IPJudge?

[Bryan J. S. <b.j...@ie...>]

Sam Snow wrote:
> Jack,
> Would you consider making the add-onz framework part of the main
> distribution which would allow for easier and wider use of them? It is a
> similar idea to the plug-ins concept that SquirrelMail
> http://www.squirrelmail.org/ uses.

I have devoted 0 minutes to development of IPCop, so I readily admit my 
opinion really doesn't mean swat at this point.

But given the focus of the project, and various input from those who 
have, it is clear to me that many things would be better left to a 
separate, "sister box" in the DMZ.

Call it "IPJudge" if you will.  Throw a lot of the user-level components 
and capabilities people are asking for on it (proxy w/blocking, mail, 
DNS, etc...).  Leave IPCop itself with the kernel-level capabilities 
that you wouldn't want to bog down with those "IPJudge" user-level services.

Sure, IPCop itself has various user-level capabilities, but they are 
(and should stay) "minimal."  My viewpoint is that anything 
non-kernel/inspection-type on IPCop is only for people who just need one 
system and basic capabilities.  Anything that is more advanced should go 
on a dedicated system.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I.   b.j...@ie...   http://thebs.org
If you want the stupid letters:   http://thebs.org/certs.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------
Running Windows applications under Linux does not reduce any
political/legal "costs" but does increase the overall tech-
nical "costs."  Linux is not a better Windows than Windows.