Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 19:55:26 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Nicholas Esborn <nick@netdot.net> Cc: Marc Spitzer <mspitze1@optonline.net>, "" <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: The way forward Message-ID: <20030210195158.P4682-100000@patrocles.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <20030205192433.GB59212@carbon.berkeley.netdot.net> References: <20030128085617.L167@woody.ops.uunet.co.za> <3E415602.30669.FF9FC2@localhost> <20030205182601.GA59212@carbon.berkeley.netdot.net> <20030205140532.4ff4390c.mspitze1@optonline.net> <20030205192433.GB59212@carbon.berkeley.netdot.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Nicholas Esborn wrote: > Sadly, most of the discussion I've seen here about pf on FreeBSD is > basically "Why would we need another packet filter?" > > -nick You misheard the question. It's really: "Why should I spend time importing PF for Nick when I have other things to work on?" If you take the time to create a patchset which allows PF to work on FreeBSD, there's a much greater chance that PF could end up in FreeBSD. (Assuming that the changes are structured in a way such that future imports of PF would not be an overly complicated matter.) Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030210195158.P4682-100000>