Cisco Security Manager does all that and more. The key features being Interface roles and ACL/device hierarchy.

Obviously this is not opensource.

"Actually they have every right to do whatever they like as long as it is within the law"

You _MAY_ be correct and it is later found they do have a legal right as the result of a technicality. It is unfortunate the Samba announcement used the words "no right to", that phrase (like the GPL it seems) leaves wiggle room for semantic debate.

The real issue before us is quite simple. It is undetermined whether or not Novell broke the legal agreement of the GPL, however it appears the majority of GPL software developers understood the GPL to forbid this type of behavior. It is also clear that a large percentage of Novell's users (opensuse mailing list / forums etc..) feel Novell's actions are harmful to our community over all.

This is a horrible position for a company to be in when 99.98% of their product is produced by these same developers and users. The end result will not be a semantic debate, it will end with significant adjustments that are counter to Novell's actions and it will end with developers and users less open to working with Novell in the future.

Novell made a critical mistake thinking a legal agreement was/is more important than the social agreement between them and the community, the cost for that mistake may be more than they can pay.