From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E8821F3E5 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:44:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id t1S4iJgj013898; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:44:20 -0800 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:44:19 -0800 (PST) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Dave Taht In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Frank Horowitz , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Just FYI: WNDR3700 (v2???) refurbs available on Amazon for USD49.99 X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 04:45:01 -0000 On Fri, 27 Feb 2015, Dave Taht wrote: >> you may have posted this and I'm just not remembering, but do you have a >> list of what's in CeroWRT that OpenWRT won't take upstream (and any info on >> why they won't take the items)? >> >> Daivd Lang trying to break this down by what's a config policy vs what's code (or significant config logic) > * Unbridged interfaces - routing only simple config > * Device Naming by function rather than type is this code or just a set of config settings? > * More open to ipv6 firewall is this just default settings? > * Firewall using device pattern matching to avoid O(n) complexities in > firewall rules This sounds like default settings. > * Babels on and preconfigured by default any code here? or is just that it's there by default? > * Oddball IP address range and /27 subnets simple config > * Polipo Web proxy is this just a different default than upstream? > * Samba by default simple config > * Faster web server just a different default? > * Weird port for the configuration web server simple default > * Pre-enabled wifi and wifi mesh interfaces different defaults > * Huge amount of alternate qdiscs (like pie, ns2_codel, cake, cake2, etc) any custom code here or is this just different kernel config options being turned on? > And: > > A build that includes all these things by default. The vast majority of these seem to be config selections rather then code. Which shows a huge amount of progress from the early days. There seem to be a couple policy points that are worth trying to fight to get upstream 1. Device Naming by function 2. Firewall rules by device pattern matching. 3. pre-enabled wifi and mesh interfaces 4. Samba default (see the recent discussion of common authentication) 5. possibly the web proxy Things that are probably not worth fighting for 1. a build that includes all of this by default 2. all the alternate qdiscs enabled by default 3. weird port for the config web server 4. oddball IP ranges, /27 subnets, bables, and routing between interfaces by default. (This is an approach that is perfect for the "super-duper" builders, although this may just end up being a different default config) any major disagreements or things I missed? It hit me as I was finishing this that a couple things may combine here. By doing device naming by function, firewall rules by device (which ends up being by function), it may make it far easier to have alternate configs, one for bridging, one for routing, and to have options to pre-enable the wifi and mesh interfaces. Thoughts from those who have been more involved with pushing things upstream? David Lang