Re: Replace mini_httpd?
Chris Buechler <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.firewalls.m0n0wall |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Ralf Hesse<[email protected]> wrote: > Is there no possibility to increase these kiddy 128 MB RAM?? > No. There are quite a few 64 and 128 MB systems out there. This project is focused towards embedded hardware, where limited resources is the norm. > I think we should also have a look forward...? > There are now standard-RAMs with at least 2 GB available... > Do these embedded Boards not use standard-SIMMs? No. That's not how embedded hardware works, virtually all of it has onboard RAM. Even the new ALIX boards are only 256 MB. Which is plenty really. It's actually impossible to exhaust 256 MB RAM with the functionality available in m0n0wall, and extremely difficult to exhaust 128 MB. For systems with more resources where you want to take advantage of additional functionality that needs more resources, pfSense is a better fit, even on embedded hardware with the new nanobsd-based embedded. There has been some discussion amongst the developers about changing to a nanobsd-style way of doing things post-1.3, where the entire file system doesn't get put into RAM, for exactly this reason. Then you don't have to be as size-conscious since RAM consumption then wouldn't be directly related to the size of the system on CF. But it still remains to be determined how things will progress post-1.3.