> > Are you talking about PF or IPF in 4.9? If it's IPF, it's a kernel
> > option.
>
> PF. I already have IPF working. I am more familiar with PF and would
> rather be using it.
>
> Thanks
>
Ah. Ok. Misunderstood.
--
Micheal Patterson
TSG Network Administration
405-917-0600
Confidentiali
On Dec 31, 2003, at 12:13 PM, Micheal Patterson wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Will Prater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: ipf / pf availability in 4.9
- Original Message -
From: "Will Prater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: ipf / pf availability in 4.9
>
> On Dec 31, 2003, at 5:12 AM, fbsd_user wrote:
>
&
isted in: ipv6
Description : Sources : Package : Changes : Download
http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/index.html
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Will Prater
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 2:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ipf / pf avai
59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ipf / pf availability in 4.9
List,
Anyone know if there is a way to get PF to port to FreeBSD 4.9?
Thanks
On Dec 30, 2003, at 7:26 PM, fbsd_user wrote:
> PF has been just ported to FBSD. I don't know if ipf & pf have a
> common code backg
List,
Anyone know if there is a way to get PF to port to FreeBSD 4.9?
Thanks
On Dec 30, 2003, at 7:26 PM, fbsd_user wrote:
PF has been just ported to FBSD. I don't know if ipf & pf have a
common code background, but I do know pf & ipf have totally
different rule processing logic though the rule
