Hello, Mark. You wrote 15 апреля 2013 г., 2:25:07: >> Yes! This is the most clever thought in this thread. Why we need 3 >> firewalls? Two packet filters it's excess too. We have two packet filters: >> one with excellent syntax and functionality but with outdated bandwidth >> control mechanism (aka ALTQ); another - with nice traffic >> shaper/prioritization (dummynet)/classification (diffused) but with >> complicated implementation in not trivial tasks. May be the next step >> will be discussion about one packet filter in the system?..
MM> ... and as far as I can tell none of them is currently usable MM> on an IPv6-only FreeBSD (like protecting a host with sshguard), MM> none of them supports stateful NAT64, nor IPv6 prefix translation :( IPv6 prefix translation?! AGAIN!? FML. I've thought, that IPv6 will render all that NAT nightmare to void. I hope, IPv6 prefix translation will not be possible never ever! -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <l...@freebsd.org> _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
