From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 18 07:44:42 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 40B0137B401; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 07:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.omnis.com (smtp.omnis.com [216.239.128.26])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 879AE43F75; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 07:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from wes@softweyr.com)
Received: from softweyr.homeunix.net (66-91-236-204.san.rr.com
	[66.91.236.204])	by smtp-relay.omnis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A07FB5B67D; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 07:44:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>
Organization: Softweyr
To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>,
	John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@efn.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 07:44:38 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2
References: <20030717080805.GA98878@dragon.nuxi.com>
	<20030717085439.GC35337@funkthat.com> <200307170902.20004.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200307170902.20004.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200307180744.38792.wes@softweyr.com>
cc: darrenr@freebsd.org
cc: arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Things to remove from /rescue
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:44:42 -0000

On Thursday 17 July 2003 06:05 am, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday 17 July 2003 04:54 am, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > Luigi Rizzo wrote this message on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 01:50 -0700:
> > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 01:43:33AM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > > > David O'Brien wrote this message on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 01:08 
-0700:
> > > > > - ipfw & natd & ipf & ipfs & ipfstat & ipmon & ipnan, why would
> > > > > one needs these?  /rescue is to fix a borked /, not replace
> > > > > PicoBSD.
> > > >
> > > > ipfw I can see as useful.  If you have a kernel that defaults to
> > > > closed, and you need to access the network, then this is a
> > > > problem.  If we had
> > >
> > > actually, this is trivial to fix:
> > >
> > > 	sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable=0
> >
> > I didn't know about this. :)
> >
> > My objection to removing it has been removed. :)  I now support
> > removing ipfw and friends (from /rescue).
>
> I believe that sysctl only affects ipfw, so people using ipfilter might
> still need ipf if ipfilter defaults to block as well.

It would seem advisable to add such a sysctl for ipfilter.  Any 
objections, Darren?

-- 

        Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?

Wes Peters                                               wes@softweyr.com