On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 11:35:00AM +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote: > > What makes you think there are not maintainers of ipf? > > Because there's not been any commits for some time? > Because anyone close to a maintainer would have pulled up kern/52469 to -7.
That would be more the commiter's job. But if someone can test a patch, I can look at it. > Because anyone close to a maintainer would have answered kern/52471. Really, there is little information in this PR. I guess nobody tried to guess what the author means (I certainly wont). > > > Actually I'm not aware of show-stopper bugs in ipf, and I run several > > servers > > (netbsd-8) facing internet, with ipv6 and quite a bit of traffic. > So, with -8, you at least have the fix to kern/52469. > > I don't know about the version in -8, but (from memory) > -- ipftest doesn't correctly reflect the real behaviour I didn't play much with ipftest. But in any case this doesn't prevent using ipf > -- rule numbers in ipfstat sometimes don't match that's an annoyance, but it doens't prevent using it > -- keep state doesn't work with ICMP6 I avoid keep-state as much as possible, and actually use it only for UDP. -- Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
