2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
Hi,
1. Why PF 4.2 not 4.7 or 4.8?
OpenBSD page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html
has one important remark bolded: In particular, there are
significant differences between 4.6 and 4.7.
Doeas it mean that I would have to learn something
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 08:04:21 +0200
Stathis Kamperis ekamp...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
Hi,
1. Why PF 4.2 not 4.7 or 4.8?
OpenBSD page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html
has one important remark bolded: In particular, there are
significant
FreeBSD and NetBSD with ten times bigger teams still use PF from
OpenBSD 3.*? There isn't single initiative to change that, moreover
FreeBSD is sticking with ipfw and NetBSD started creating own
implementation - NPF.
There was discussion here and there, why they started creating NPF
instead of
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 00:28:29 +0100, Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl
wrote:
Hi,
1. Why PF 4.2 not 4.7 or 4.8?
Going from pf as included in OpenBSD 3.5 to the version in OpenBSD 4.2
already included changing some ten thousands line of code, including
changing network subsystems that are
2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 08:04:21 +0200
Stathis Kamperis ekamp...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
Hi,
1. Why PF 4.2 not 4.7 or 4.8?
OpenBSD page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html
has one important remark
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:29:34 +0200
Stathis Kamperis ekamp...@gmail.com wrote:
(...)
Besides, just think of it. As the OpenBSD team ***did*** the work
(for others, DF including) why not to jump to the latest version? Is
not justified such thinking?
1. They did not do the work for DF nor
On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:16:54 +0100
Jan Lentfer jan.lent...@web.de wrote:
I have to say one thing, too: Your demands towards this project in
regard to documentation, actuality, features, etc, are pretty high,
Should I choose the list common denominator?
First of all I said/pointed at that DF
* Przemys??aw Pawe??czyk wrote:
First of all I said/pointed at that DF lacks PF Guide known from
OpenBSD. Yes, my language was demanding the more so DF PF 4.2 is
different from PF 4.7+. The MAN page is not enough, some examples like
the OpenBSD's Firewall for Home or Small Office would be
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:21:42 +0100, Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl
wrote:
1. I understand that someone will put PF 4.2 guide on DF WWW.
You just volunteered?
[...]
4. I do know nothing about packet filters future implementations in
DF:
a) was the PF 4.2 implemented verbatim or was it
On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 15:56:42 +0100
Jan Lentfer jan.lent...@web.de wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:21:42 +0100, Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl
wrote:
1. I understand that someone will put PF 4.2 guide on DF WWW.
You just volunteered?
Nope. :-( I answered why privately to one of the Mail
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Jan Lentfer jan.lent...@web.de wrote:
if you just formulate your emails a little less
demanding. I get the impression that you are trying to goad people involved
in this project - on purpose or by weakness of character, I haven't found
out yet. Of course I hope
On Tue, November 2, 2010 7:28 pm, PrzemysÅaw PaweÅczyk wrote:
Hi,
1. Why PF 4.2 not 4.7 or 4.8?
OpenBSD page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html
has one important remark bolded: In particular, there are
significant differences between 4.6 and 4.7.
Doeas it mean that I would have to
On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:37:32 -0400
Justin C. Sherrill jus...@shiningsilence.com wrote:
2. But support for the PF 4.2 is sorta soft (weak), as well.
I wasn't able to find PF 4.2 doc files on DF BSD WWW.
I'd like to see them in the form of OpenBSD's PF: The
OpenBSD Packet Filter
2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:37:32 -0400
Justin C. Sherrill jus...@shiningsilence.com wrote:
2. But support for the PF 4.2 is sorta soft (weak), as well.
I wasn't able to find PF 4.2 doc files on DF BSD WWW.
I'd like to see them in the form of
2010/11/3 Przemysław Pawełczyk pp...@o2.pl:
Yes, I did. :-) But as I said - there are dicrepencies - how big?
Where?
The rule set changes are major.
On the other hand DF should provide good documentation on PF issues.
Better than now.
you can get 4.2 doc or any older doc from the CVS
2010/11/3 Siju George sgeorge...@gmail.com:
you can get 4.2 doc or any older doc from the CVS WEB
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/www/faq/pf/
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/
might be better :-)
--Siju
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 07:25:13 +0530
Siju George sgeorge...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/11/3 Siju George sgeorge...@gmail.com:
you can get 4.2 doc or any older doc from the CVS WEB
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/www/faq/pf/
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/
17 matches
Mail list logo
