From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 18 14:34:05 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@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 B800C958; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-x232.google.com (mail-yh0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 597632AE0; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f50.google.com with SMTP id v1so2316208yhn.9 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:34:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=za4PRX9NODwUWP+0/7RLro07UWPcPwGQ22ZKDv9bz7I=; b=bOcLGCi90YaqCh6Jnv1HFgDN0VeSlMBh+WwGe9jASj72Z9D484i6aGdRFeS5t8Bwhu YlVV/xkf/D/GEJ4Li+2HaBEdcq2S0uJdMk3IXy0oLRSbgEZf9BzoBAvEIklWt1mTtZaU lhAifbfMVULRkJ+ruZz1RFfYPKpjoBH1EsVBFOgDgYnop1EDiFF1h9vhKB7HxEAGt5p5 BiZa6VUEI2JRlDXw0ik6HPU2nSSXATv1N+ZYl49kE774a00ciCGI1O7LnvFABfAi0VGp RKErK6917qgtAFHe3YZ6frsxC0o4jFFko8vGjPICVwFQ+8xT2aynM7cflpxrsd/w4pOg Ap+A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.74.101 with SMTP id w65mr7893774yhd.103.1405694044570; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:34:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.132.80 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:34:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk> <20140718110645.GN87212@FreeBSD.org> <20140718151255.b3e677d9.gerrit.kuehn@aei.mpg.de> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:34:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ? From: krad To: Matt Bettinger X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:37:07 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Gleb Smirnoff , FreeBSD Mailing List , =?UTF-8?B?R2Vycml0IEvDvGhu?= 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 14:34:05 -0000 that is true and I have not problem using man pages, however thats not the way most of the world work and search engines arent exactly new either. We should be trying to engage more people not less, and part of that is reaching out. On 18 July 2014 15:10, Matt Bettinger wrote: > Back in the day we didn't have Google to ask the oracle for cut and paste > answers. If the man page is accurate that should be good enough. > On Jul 18, 2014 8:26 AM, "krad" wrote: > >> this is also another important point. If you go onto google and search o= n >> how to do this and that under pf, you get a mix of freebsd, and openbsd >> stuff coming up. I havent analysed it but i think the majority of the >> stuff >> is openbsd related. THerefore I find some nice solution to my problem, >> only >> to find out a bit later I cant use it because its not supported under >> freebsd. This is anoying, but more importantly confuses new sysadmins an= d >> puts them off adopting pf and possibly a bsd at all. >> >> >> On 18 July 2014 14:12, Gerrit K=C3=BChn wrote: >> >> > On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 15:06:45 +0400 Gleb Smirnoff >> > wrote about Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have on= e >> ?: >> > >> > GS> The pf mailing list is about a dozen of active people. Yes, they a= re >> > 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 readin= g >> 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 >> > _______________________________________________ >> > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " >> > freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to " >> freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >