Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:37:55 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Jonathan Graehl <jonathan@graehl.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ipf license woes Message-ID: <20010529223755.A14304@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <001e01c0e8c9$3398db20$6dfeac40@straylight.com>; from jonathan@graehl.org on Tue, May 29, 2001 at 10:27:20PM -0700 References: <001e01c0e8c9$3398db20$6dfeac40@straylight.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 10:27:20PM -0700, Jonathan Graehl wrote: > >From Theo (OpenBSD): >=20 > "sometime in the next 20 hours, i will be removing ipf from the source > tree since it does not meet our freedom requirements, as have been > outlined in policy.html and goals.html since the start of our project.=20 >=20 > we will have to work on an alternative." >=20 > I've used netfilter/iptables (Linux 2.4 and on) fairly extensively, and > it seems to be a good ipf-alike. Sorry, but how is the above relevant to FreeBSD? The licensing flame-war isn't news, and it's something we've already been clarifying with Darren. My own perspective is that it's been badly mishandled by a lot of people and blown out of all proportion. Kris --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7FIczWry0BWjoQKURAi/cAKCWc1A50wUW4MR/e5Ce/tRvMH+AiwCcCpgO MHr6T1kGHX/cW0CLgnE5ViQ= =rbKY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010529223755.A14304>