[FINISH] Re: Router in Fedora. Alternative to Mikrotik

[Fabio Jara]

Thanks Tim, i actually think the same way as you, i think is better to use
the console way of doing things, when i was presented to the Router OS of
Mikrotik i think it was marvelous because the time i expend in doing all the
same think as the Mikrotik does is way much more. So my question was done in
base of the possibly less time in doing my work :D

But again, i think you are right., wen there is an update the GUI tools
often falls behind. and of course these tools not stain the same
"malleability" as the traditional way.

So that finish my doubt.

Thanks to all that have answer.

Best regards.

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Tim <ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 12:57 -0400, Fabio Jara wrote:
> > After some research about what Peter said i realize that your looking
> > about the hardware of mikrotik, i was asking about the ROUTER OS that
> > they use con that hardware. Something that can do the same, without
> > editing and configuring all those services one by one. I already have
> > a Fedora 11 Server with DNS, Apache, Samba, Mysql, DHCP and Squid
> > configured and working. What i want to do is manage all of them, like
> > adding users to Squid, and setting the bandwidth they can use  by
> > user, that kind of stuff. A GUI interface is going to save me a lot of
> > time.
> >
> > Also, i have Webmin installed, but it doesn't give me that kind of
> > management.
>
> To be pedantic, you won't manage them all with one interface.  Even for
> tools for configuring one particular thing, you'll be switching between
> different pages for different aspects of the configuration of it.  So,
> on that note, it's not that different to use different tools to
> configure different things.  Though, compared to some of the tools that
> worked on two or more related, things (different services that work
> together), you lose that convenience.
>
> There's a plethora of GUI configuration tools that can be called up from
> the menu, and I think there's still a control centre application which
> bungs them all into a window (instead of a menu).
>
> But I've always found the GUI tools to be limiting.  For instance, they
> often only supported a small amount of the options you could configure,
> and sometimes you had to understand how to manually configure something
> to work out the GUI tool, anyway (e.g BIND configuration).
>
> And, from time to time, they were out of date.  The thing that they
> configured had changed, over time, but the third-party tool for
> configuring them was still doing things the old, and incompatible, way.
>
> Or they required the configuration file to be set up in a particular
> way, or they stored a configuration somewhere else and updated the main
> configuration with their own, making it impossible to manually configure
> things as well.
>
> --
> [tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
> 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
>
> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
> read messages from the public lists.
>
>
>
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
> Guidelines:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
>



-- 
Fabio Jara.
Universidad Privada del Este - Paraguay.
IT Manager.
Fedora Ambassador for Paraguay.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20091004/4e76fd3c/attachment-0001.html