Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 22 Jun 2013 20:51:46 +0200
From:      Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass@gmx.com>
To:        Chris Buechler <cbuechler@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: PF bugs
Message-ID:  <51C5F242.1010608@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOmxWMXfKyr5gjQUpqqraTVaLJ3XOFNK7P040FPOCSaMGigXdA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <1371865788.22524.9.camel@localhost> <CAOmxWMXfKyr5gjQUpqqraTVaLJ3XOFNK7P040FPOCSaMGigXdA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Chris (and list),

On 06/22/2013 04:44 AM, Chris Buechler wrote:
> pf is actively developed and maintained on FreeBSD, and widely used.
> The PRs that are open are largely ages old, no longer relevant and
> need to be cleaned up, or were bunk to begin with. There aren't really
> that many open either considering, every component of any widely used
> OS has open bugs. That's not indicative of anything in itself
> generally. FreeBSD+pf is the base of a significant number of
> firewalls, 180,000+ known live systems on pfSense alone (though that's
> not quite stock FreeBSD pf, it's close), and many others.

It seems that people think that pf is unmaintained.
Quite a disheartening thing for the person that did the hard work
to create the smp-friendly pf in FreeBSD-10...

I would be very happy if you had some performance comparison numbers
between the old and new pf code that you would like to publish!

Thanks a lot,

Nikos




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51C5F242.1010608>