Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 21:52:53 -0500 From: Maxim Khitrov <max@mxcrypt.com> To: Paul Webster <paul.g.webster@googlemail.com> Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. Message-ID: <CAJcQMWdJhZNRq=hXAGCxX-wP9SZJs3DmsmzVJ5B7OLPH_0xfsQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <op.wn1vktomjfousr@box.dlink.com> References: <op.wn1vktomjfousr@box.dlink.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Paul Webster <paul.g.webster@googlemail.com> wrote: > Good day all, > > I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I > believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old > style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. > > There was a recent debate on ##freebsd about this issue and I was inclined > to mail in and get your opinions; basically it boiled down to the majority > of users wanting either: > > 1) To move to the newer pf and just add to releases notes what had > happened, > and > 2) my own personal opinion: creating 'pf2-*' as a kernel option tree, > basically using the newer pf syntax and allowing users to choose. > > I would be interested to know the feedback from you guys as to be honest > there seems to be quite a few users who actually DO want the new style > format and functionality that comes with. My vote is for option 1, but I'll also be happy with option 2 if it costs little to maintain both versions. I'm pretty much for anything that brings pf in sync (or close to it) with OpenBSD. - Max
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJcQMWdJhZNRq=hXAGCxX-wP9SZJs3DmsmzVJ5B7OLPH_0xfsQ>