What a brilliantly dick move, LOL.
On 6/24/2016 1:01 PM, Karl Fife wrote:
We've entered the wonderful world of the traffic limiters.
Specifically, we put FACEBOOK subnets through a comparatively skinny
pipe. This is done to make it JUST a bit too painful to look at
kitten photos, but perfectly suitable to look at CompetitorCo's
facebook page for legitimate business purposes. We're still collecting
empirical data on how much it disuades personal use, but it doesn't
seem to create tension the way that explicit blocking would.
The issue:
in <=2.2 if an in-use limiter is renamed, the system will yell at
you. IMO, that's good.
in 2.3, if an in-use limiter is renamed, the system will not yell at
you. IMO that's bad.
Should this fact be considered a regression, or is there a reason for
removing this notice/check?
IMO, it would be preferable to abstract the limiter names the way
aliases have been abstracted (so they can be changed without the risk
of breaking things) but I understand that limiters may not be used as
frequently as aliases.
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
--
Signed,
Benjamin E. Nichols
http://www.squidblacklist.org
1-405-397-1360
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
