this is also another important point. If you go onto google and search on how to do this and that under pf, you get a mix of freebsd, and openbsd stuff coming up. I havent analysed it but i think the majority of the stuff is openbsd related. THerefore I find some nice solution to my problem, only to find out a bit later I cant use it because its not supported under freebsd. This is anoying, but more importantly confuses new sysadmins and puts them off adopting pf and possibly a bsd at all.
On 18 July 2014 14:12, Gerrit Kühn <gerrit.ku...@aei.mpg.de> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:06:45 +0400 Gleb Smirnoff <gleb...@freebsd.org> > wrote about Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?: > > GS> The pf mailing list is about a dozen of active people. Yes, they are > GS> vocal on the new syntax. But there also exist a large number of common > GS> FreeBSD users who simply use pf w/o caring about syntax and reading pf > GS> mailing list. If we destroy the syntax compatibility a very large > GS> population of users would be hurt, for the sake of making a dozen > GS> happy. > > I have thought about this for some time now, and I think I do not agree. I > do remember quite well when OpenBSD changed from ipf to pf, and I had to > come up with new rules files. Yes, this is a burden for people maintaining > these systems, but if the thing is well documented and comes with benefits > (like staying in sync with other developers, allowing new features etc.) I > doubt that many people will really be minding this. > > > cu > Gerrit > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
