From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 18 13:22:27 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD29FFF7; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from umail.aei.mpg.de (umail.aei.mpg.de [194.94.224.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FAB7236C; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:22:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailgate.aei.mpg.de (mailgate.aei.mpg.de [194.94.224.5]) by umail.aei.mpg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26FA200A42; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:13:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailgate.aei.mpg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id D4D32405889; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:13:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from intranet.aei.uni-hannover.de (ahin1.aei.uni-hannover.de [130.75.117.40]) by mailgate.aei.mpg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EE83406AF1; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:13:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cascade.aei.uni-hannover.de ([10.117.15.111]) by intranet.aei.uni-hannover.de (Lotus Domino Release 8.5.3FP6) with ESMTP id 2014071815125603-34207 ; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:12:56 +0200 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:12:55 +0200 From: Gerrit =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=FChn?= To: Gleb Smirnoff Subject: Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ? Message-Id: <20140718151255.b3e677d9.gerrit.kuehn@aei.mpg.de> In-Reply-To: <20140718110645.GN87212@FreeBSD.org> References: <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk> <20140718110645.GN87212@FreeBSD.org> Organization: Max Planck Gesellschaft X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.3 (GTK+ 2.24.19; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on intranet/aei-hannover(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 07/18/2014 15:12:56, Serialize by Router on intranet/aei-hannover(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 07/18/2014 15:13:06, Serialize complete at 07/18/2014 15:13:06 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 6.0.2.2308539, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2014.7.18.130319 X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIIIII, Probability=9%, Report=' MULTIPLE_RCPTS 0.1, HTML_00_01 0.05, HTML_00_10 0.05, MIME_LOWER_CASE 0.05, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_1000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_900_999 0, __ANY_URI 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_FROM 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __IN_REP_TO 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __MULTIPLE_RCPTS_CC_X2 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __URI_NO_PATH 0, __URI_NO_WWW 0, __URI_NS ' Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:22:27 -0000 On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:06:45 +0400 Gleb Smirnoff wrote about Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?: GS> The pf mailing list is about a dozen of active people. Yes, they are GS> vocal on the new syntax. But there also exist a large number of common GS> FreeBSD users who simply use pf w/o caring about syntax and reading pf GS> mailing list. If we destroy the syntax compatibility a very large GS> population of users would be hurt, for the sake of making a dozen GS> happy. I have thought about this for some time now, and I think I do not agree. I do remember quite well when OpenBSD changed from ipf to pf, and I had to come up with new rules files. Yes, this is a burden for people maintaining these systems, but if the thing is well documented and comes with benefits (like staying in sync with other developers, allowing new features etc.) I doubt that many people will really be minding this. cu Gerrit