Hi, I totally understand the position you're in and sympathize. I've never heard of Cisco routers being able to run OpenBSD though IOS is based on BSD as far as I'm aware.
Not a direct solution to your use case but you could always run a small mini-itx or SBC system behind the Cisco router. You could put it as a firewall solution and have the OBSD box doing all the major routing, vlans, firewall (pf) etc... while the Cisco could just simply forward information between the private and public IP ranges. Or if using dial-in then you can bridge the OBSD and Cisco then use OBSD as the PPPoE device.... It is one suggestion in any case though it might not be the most ideal. Regards, Kaya On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Daniel Ouellet <dan...@presscom.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > This might be a bit weird question, but I saw the wireguard being put in > the kernel in the last few days and I am very existed abut it oppose to > use the package on it and even today there was more on it. > > Many thanks for this!!! > > I also know there was effort and some Cisco router can run OpenBSD very > well, however I have no clue as to any of this stand now. > > I don't have a problem to use APU type or other Ubiquit for small > OpenBSD router, but I wonder about using Cisco instead. The only reason > is for may be more stability, most likely less performance for sure, but > less change to have corrupted reboot on power lost, etc. > > And sadly for some customers having what they see as computer as router > don't make them fell good, but seeing a Cisco box kind of wipe out the > impression. I am not saying it's justify, but perception is sometime > everything, but if I have my say in it I want all my routers to be > OpenBSD as much as I can where the needs is not to multiple Gb in speed. > > So, any suggestion or updates as to what's now available and hopefully > in use now. > > I really don't care for any special model, or even Juniper, as long as I > can put OpenBSD on it. > > So any feedback as to where it's stand now and what's usable in a > reliable way would be greatly appreciated. > > And yes I know I may well get better performance in some cases with a > small APU device then a Cisco one, but that's for what we all know may > not be logical to be used, but for sadly how some clients may fell, not > knowing any better. > > I guess you can see that as some people do security by obstruction, but > we al know it's not more secure, this is routing by obstruction I guess > and may be less performant, but achieve comfort obstruction confidence. > > I just have no clue if wireguard needs to be run, what can be achieve as > the CPU in all Cisco device is always under power, we all know that. > > This may not go anywhere, however I liked to look even if for nothing > else then just being fun to do if that can't even be usable. > > Many thanks for your time and feedback. > > Daniel > > PS; And yes, that's most likely stupid I know. Sometime what's used is > not always what make sense for other reason that are stupid. >
