pfSense Support Subscription

Author Topic: a pfSense roadmap  (Read 23659 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gonzopancho

  • Guest
a pfSense roadmap
« on: February 25, 2015, 07:36:25 pm »

Offline NOYB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1704
  • Karma: +159/-273
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2015, 08:11:33 pm »
 
Thanks for sharing with us the road map.  It's nice to know where the chauffeur is taking us.
 
Any mile stone timeline goals, estimates, hopes, wishful thinking, anything?
 
Thanks
 

Offline stan-qaz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Karma: +13/-0
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2015, 09:28:47 pm »
Seeing all the coming changes is really exciting and I'm looking forward to playing them. I do have a couple questions after reading the blog entry though, about hardware.

What is going to be the minimum levels of hardware to support all the new features?

Are you or Netgate going to be able offer something in the $200.00 range for the low-end market, folks with small networks and not a lot of speed or traffic? The new SG-2440 looks really nice but the price is out of what I can justify for my needs.

I'd really love to move on to the new 3.0 if at all possible at my price point, sounds like a lot more fun than staying with the legacy 2.X releases.

Offline phil.davis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • Karma: +550/-3
    • View Profile
    • International Nepal Fellowship
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2015, 12:38:05 am »
The PCengines APU is 64 bit, 2GB or 4GB real memory, 3 NICs and in that price range. That provides a suitable base system for me in the low-power-consumption, small office/home office niche and it should run pfSense 3.0 with no problem. And there are other low-end 64-bit systems out there also. With the ARM on FreeBSD things happening, I would guess there will be low-end 64-bit ARM hardware that will also meet the low-end needs.

Roadmap looks good. Separating the GUI presentation code from the input validation from the backend implementation is really needed. Then other bits like pfCenter can have well-defined interfaces to use to make multi-system config changes and get monitoring data...

If Python turns out to be the major selected language for a lot of the code, then thanks for the opportunity to learn another language ;)
What ever happened to good old that some of us know (and loved?) Cobol, Fortran  :-\
As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

Offline biggsy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
  • Karma: +16/-0
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2015, 12:57:34 am »
COBOL and Fortran in a forum thread and the late, great FZ invoked in a pfSense blog post. 

So now I feel I can post some details of my first computer.

Yeah, Python sounds good as a new language.

Edit by GruensFroeschli: i fixed the link
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 03:03:32 am by GruensFroeschli »

Offline kejianshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4928
  • Karma: +196/-40
  • Debugging...
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2015, 01:06:40 am »
I tell people that programming is a never ending game of catchup.  That every single time I have a reason to code something big I have to learn a new language.   Its pretty much true. 

Offline NOYB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1704
  • Karma: +159/-273
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2015, 01:21:03 am »
 
I tell people that programming is a never ending game of catchup.  That every single time I have a reason to code something big I have to learn a new language.   Its pretty much true.

Code more "something big's" and then you won't have to learn a new language every single time.  Just every other time.   ;)
 

Offline kejianshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4928
  • Karma: +196/-40
  • Debugging...
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2015, 01:39:58 am »
Ehhhhhhh.  Sounds like so much work....  haha

gonzopancho

  • Guest
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2015, 01:48:42 am »
The PCengines APU is 64 bit, 2GB or 4GB real memory, 3 NICs and in that price range.

But the Realtek NICs are awful.

Be aware that Pascal is on record about engineering a replacement in the short-term. (EOY, I imagine.) The next PC Engines board has a Jaguar (so: AES-NI) 2 or 4 core CPU, 2 or 4GB RAM (ECC on the 4GB model) and (wait for it), Intel NICs (I imagine these will be i217/218 class.)

I took this into consideration for 3.0.

Our low-end strategy is the C2000 Avoton/Rangeley series of SoCs.


Roadmap looks good. Separating the GUI presentation code from the input validation from the backend implementation is really needed. Then other bits like pfCenter can have well-defined interfaces to use to make multi-system config changes and get monitoring data...

If Python turns out to be the major selected language for a lot of the code, then thanks for the opportunity to learn another language ;)
What ever happened to good old that some of us know (and loved?) Cobol, Fortran  :-\

I wrote a lot of Fortran in my youth.

gonzopancho

  • Guest
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2015, 01:49:31 am »

Thanks for sharing with us the road map.  It's nice to know where the chauffeur is taking us.
 
Any mile stone timeline goals, estimates, hopes, wishful thinking, anything?
 
Thanks

New hardware in q3.  That's all the hint I'll give.

gonzopancho

  • Guest
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2015, 01:50:27 am »
Ehhhhhhh.  Sounds like so much work....  haha

Indeed.

Offline kejianshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4928
  • Karma: +196/-40
  • Debugging...
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2015, 02:16:04 am »
I might consider it - I have time now.  I used to be pretty good at it, relatively speaking (-;

Offline grandrivers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 566
  • Karma: +13/-2
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2015, 12:32:57 pm »
It would be great to see Apinger's issues called out with a action plan sooner vs later as I have provider issues and graphs that are unusable in helping to get these issues fixed
pfsense 2.4 super micro A1SRM-2558F
C2558 8gig ECC  60gig SSD
tripple Wan dual pppoe

Offline Derelict

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9098
  • Karma: +1037/-307
    • View Profile
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2015, 01:46:05 pm »
It would be great to see Apinger's issues called out with a action plan sooner vs later as I have provider issues and graphs that are unusable in helping to get these issues fixed
There's always cacti, etc.  pfSense doesn't have to do everything. (Not that I don't want apinger fixed/replaced, but if it's broken get another tool.)
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Use this diagram to describe your issue.
The pfSense Book is now available for just $24.70!
Do Not PM For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESSTM

gonzopancho

  • Guest
Re: a pfSense roadmap
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2015, 10:54:39 pm »
It would be great to see Apinger's issues called out with a action plan sooner vs later as I have provider issues and graphs that are unusable in helping to get these issues fixed

apinger needs a re-write.  It's garbage code.