From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 20 22:26:07 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAB4641C; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 22:26:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail2.nber.org (mail2.nber.org [198.71.6.79]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A0A2308; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 22:26:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sas1.nber.org (sas1.nber.org [198.71.6.185]) by mail2.nber.org (8.14.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s6KMQ4tX000221 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 20 Jul 2014 18:26:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from feenberg@nber.org) Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 18:26:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Feenberg To: Kurt Jaeger Subject: Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ? In-Reply-To: <20140720214629.GF197@home.opsec.eu> Message-ID: References: <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk> <20140718110645.GN87212@FreeBSD.org> <20140718151255.b3e677d9.gerrit.kuehn@aei.mpg.de> <53CA2D39.6000204@sasktel.net> <20140720123916.GV96250@e-new.0x20.net> <20140720214629.GF197@home.opsec.eu> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LRH 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Anti-Virus: Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Linux Mail Server 5.6.39/RELEASE, bases: 20140401 #7726142, check: 20140720 clean Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Mailing List X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 22:26:07 -0000 On Sun, 20 Jul 2014, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >>> And you don't seem to get the point that _someone_ has to do the work. >>> No one has stepped up so far, so nothing is going to change. > > Franco Fichtner said he's interested in doing it. He probably > needs funding. > >> No one with authority has yet said that "If an updated pf were available, >> would be welcomed". > > Which person or group would you view as "authority" in this case ? > I am not privy to the inner workings of the project, but surely a decision of this importance would come to the attention of the core team, who are listed at: http://www.freebsd.org/administration.html#t-core A port of OpenBSD PF may be quite impractical or undesirable- I have no idea. However, if all potential contributions are viewed as criticism to be refuted, it will damage the ability of the project to attract contributors. Rather than telling a potential contributor that their efforts will never be included in the official distribution it would be more supportive of the project to say that a port of PF would be welcome as a port, but might have difficulty displacing current offering. That doesn't promise anything, but encourages involvement, if indeed involvement is desired. Daniel Feenberg > -- > pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! >