From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 20 15:38:33 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@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 2ED0E339;
 Sun, 20 Jul 2014 15:38:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from host64.kissl.de (host64.kissl.de [213.239.241.64])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01E32ECE;
 Sun, 20 Jul 2014 15:38:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by host64.kissl.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B025A5A6189;
 Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:38:25 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at host64.kissl.de
Received: from host64.kissl.de ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (host64.kissl.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id kRaN-ieantYU; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:38:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.11] (95-91-220-47-dynip.superkabel.de [95.91.220.47])
 (Authenticated sender: web104p1)
 by host64.kissl.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBB93A5A6169;
 Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:38:24 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?
From: Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de>
In-Reply-To: <201407200939020335.0017641F@smtp.24cl.home>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:38:23 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <788274E2-7D66-45D9-89F6-81E8C2615D14@lastsummer.de>
References: <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk>
 <6326AB9D-C19A-434B-9681-380486C037E2@lastsummer.de>
 <53CB4736.90809@bluerosetech.com>
 <201407200939020335.0017641F@smtp.24cl.home>
To: "Mike." <the.lists@mgm51.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 15:38:33 -0000

On 20 Jul 2014, at 15:39, Mike. <the.lists@mgm51.com> wrote:

> imho, the root problem here is that an effort to implement a single
> feature improvement (multi-threading) has caused the FreeBSD version
> of pf to apparently reach a near-unmaintainable position in the
> FreeBSD community because improvements from OpenBSD can no longer be
> ported over easily.   FreeBSD's pf has been put in a virtual
> isolation chamber due to the multi-threaded enhancement.
> 
> Was it worth it?

Yes.  This happened *three times* in BSD land now.  How much more
proof does it take to make that clear?

FWIW, I'm still volunteering, but I think the direction this
discussion is going is that there is no clear direction, which makes
this a tad less effective than it could be.  ;)


Cheers,
Franco