From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 27 10:23:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8866E16A4D0; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:23:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5398443D2F; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:23:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i1RINQTA082149; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:23:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost)i1RINQBW082148; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:23:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:23:25 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Max Laier , src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040227182325.GA81744@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <200402260234.i1Q2YDx1014240@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040226060126.GA70201@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20040226061846.GB15864@saboteur.dek.spc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040226061846.GB15864@saboteur.dek.spc.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/contrib/pf/net if_pflog.c if_pflog.h if_pfsync.c if_pfsync.h pf.c pf_ioctl.c pf_norm.c pf_osfp.c pf_table.c pfvar.h src/sys/contrib/pf/netinet in4_cksum.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:23:26 -0000 On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 06:18:46AM +0000, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 10:01:26PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > Log: > > > Bring diff from the security/pf port. This has code been tested as a port > > > for a long time and is run in production use. This is the code present in > > > portversion 2.03 with some additional tweaks. > > > > Was this import discussed on arch@ or current@? We now have ipfw, ipfilter, > > and pf in the base system. How many more firewall packages are we going > > to import into the base system? Are you going to remove ipfw or ipfilter? > > Is there a NO_PF make.conf knob? > > PF is not in the base system at this time. The import is the product of > ongoing discussions between several of the network developers; core@ > have also been involved (Max was brought onto the team explicitly for > this purpose). Q: "Was this import discussed on arch@ or current@?" A: No. We held private discussions. > > The benefits (many) outweigh the disadvantages (few); pf development and > maintenance is extremely active compared to the other firewall > implementations we have. The IPv6 support is also very mature and > extensive. Maintenance of pf outside of the main kernel source tree is > difficult because of the API differences between OpenBSD and FreeBSD. > > We do not plan to remove ipfw or ipfilter at this time nor do we have > plans to remove them, until pf receives further evaluation by the user > base, there would be no mandate or grounding for such a decision. If any of ipfw, ipfilter, or ip6fw are candidates for removal, then it needs to be done before 5-STABLE is branched. Otherwise, we need to find individuals to actively maintain each of these throughout the lifetime of 5.X (a 3 to 5 year time span). > I also have Evil Plans(tm) for pf on FreeBSD. Care to summarize your plans? -- Steve