Features that you would like to see

[FG1kc]

Why limit to Authentication-based routing,can' t fortinet have Address-based and Device Identity routing on the policy tab itself rahter than putting it on the policy route tab would be very nice to have when your using/have multiple gateways

[FlashOver]

That we can define, from which network a admin interface will respond in general, independ if the admin account is allowed to access the admin interface form this network. this could be improved within the Local In Policy. http://support.fortinet.com/forum/tm.asp?m=105154&p=1&tmode=1&smode=1

[Dubridze]

Description for DHCP reservations

[Jordan_Thompson_FTNT]

Description for DHCP reservations

This is available in 5.0.

[joco_ph]

sms collection for guest

[Maik]

sms collection for guest

what you mean by that? a guest user can register himself by entering a mobile number and gets the password sent by sms? this can be achieved together with the FortiAuthenticator

[FlashOver]

I would love so see hardware modules to add directly a VDSL2 modem for example to the box so I do not need a DSL router in front anymore. That' s one of they main reasons why enterprise customers buy the Juniper SRX instead of a Fortigate. That would be awesome.

[Sherpa]

For the SIP ALG feature, the opportunity to preserve the original source IP address in the Viaheader in a SIP message

[FlashOver]

If we think on the NSA - it would be great if Fortinet would support some less widespread encryption protocols for VPN. Between Fortigate units and FortiClient it would work fine and that' s okay. I believe, the NSA is trained to crack AES, DES, SSL and other common cryptographic protocols day by day. But if we could use something different - maybe developed in-house by fortinet for example - thy would have a lot more trouble to decrypt that, because it' s not that common. THAT would be outstanding in the market. For interoperation with other vendors, fortunate customers could use AES as well of course but within the Fortinet eco system it would be great to have alternatives. Maybe with an open API so that it is easy so implement new cryptographic protocols if necessary of when the customer has the necessary manpower and knowledge.

[rwdorman]

I' d like to see the ability to specificy Subnets or incoming interfaces that alwasy represent " On Net" for FCT registration. Right now if there is another L3 device between the FGT and the client they show up as " off net"

[jorge9090]

I would like to see more functions in the DLP module, it is pretty simple in my opinion