On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
Andreas Davour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have read the handbook about firewalls, and compiled my kernel without switching on any explicit support for pf.
Now, when I ran the mergemaster it suddenly found a lot of references to pf in my startup scripts.
The startup scripts support pf, but do not require it.
Ok, That's a relief. I didn't do anything stupid.
Is pf some kind of mandatory part of the base system these days? I thought it was some kind of alternative to IPFW, but now I'm no longer so sure.
It is a part of the base system. It is always present just like ipfw, but its use is not required.
So, the base systems ships with two firewalls? Why? Reading about firewalls in the handbook, I realized I didn't know much about them. I'd say that adding some more text to the handbook about those two and how they [don't] interact might be a good idea. I don't know enough to do it.
Can someone tell me if it's ok to just use IPFW on my STABLE system, or is there some other knobs in the kernelconfig I should toggle to turn off pf support?
You are fine the way you are. I recommend letting mergemaster update the default pf startup files, so that it won't ask about them next time, but it doesn't really matter if you're not using pf.
Will do.
Thanks for the help!
/Andreas
-- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
