Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 04:04:13 -0000 From: Ryan Verner <xfesty@computeraddictions.com.au> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: pf4freebsd@freelists.org Subject: [pf4freebsd] Re: Maturity of this port? Message-ID: <40B2E306.1060909@computeraddictions.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200405250756.55875.max@love2party.net> References: <40B2DAD4.2040005@computeraddictions.com.au> <200405250756.55875.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Howdy, Thanks for the quick response! Max Laier wrote: > On Tuesday 25 May 2004 07:34, Ryan Verner wrote: > > Okay, I'll try to address these fairly general questions: > 1) As you might have seen (I should really update the homepage) the port is > now part of the FreeBSD source tree. Do update the webpage; I found the commit in freebsd's cvs tree immediately after I posted this by searching in Google. ALTQ doesn't look like it's there, though, and that's really what I'm after :-( > 2) FreeBSD 5.x is -CURRENT and as such not recommend for production use > per-se. However, if you find FreeBSD-5.x reasonably stable in your > environment pf will not be the show-stopper. I use 5.x on all my boxes and am > satisfied, even tracking -CURRENT (with a delay of a week or so) is good for > most application I think. I've been running early 5.X-CURRENT builds since 2002; I've found it reasonably stable on standard hardware, but it flakes out with anything like ACPI or SMP. For this particular task (shaping/firewalling/routing), I'm happy running it. > 3) FreeBSD-Current has the same feature-set as OpenBSD 3.4. Everything should > work as known from OpenBSD. ALTQ is not part of FreeBSD (yet). One major > problem with 3.4 however, is the lack of dynamic interface support. This > might cause problems with certain mpd setups (when tun0 is destroyed it might > trigger a panic when pf still has a reference to this interface). D'oh; I really do need ALTQ. > 4) An (experimental) import of OpenBSD 3.5 and ALTQ is available from: > http://people.freebsd.org/~mlaier/ I run it on two router, my laptop and my > desktop/development machine without problems, but am still waiting for more > feedback from other list-users. I can only encourage you to give it a spin, I > am very confident that this will match your needs. I can certainly test it on my own connections, but I'm looking to replace production-use OpenBSD shapers, and any downtime is a big no-no (in short, wireless ISP, many customers). I think I'll look further into this project for my intended task once ALTQ matures and reaches the base system; any idea how long that would be? > 5) Daniel Hartmeier accepted a FreeBSD commit-bit to maintain the port on > FreeBSD in addition to myself. We will try to stay in sync with OpenBSD > stable and will very likely import more reliability fixes from OpenBSD > current than OpenBSD MFC's to its stable branch (as the policy for MFC'ing is > very strict over there). > > Summary: > If you need ALTQ, we don't have a stable solution yet, but you are invited to > test the patches (which are very close to stable already). If you do not need > ALTQ you can install FreeBSD-current and have OpenBSD 3.4-STABLE pf. ALTQ is /the/ reason why I'm running OpenBSD; pf/altq is the only thing the boxes are doing (I'm running FreeBSD or Debian for other tasks). Sigh, seems for now I'll have to stick with OpenBSD - userland is so damn backwards, and the lack of a decent, somewhat automated, and most importantly supported way to upgrade a system from one release to another is a very sore point with me. I'll certainly play with this on my own connection, though. Thanks, R
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40B2E306.1060909>