Hi Mike,
> And what is the point of all of this when we have OpenBSD's PF? ipfw and
> libalias is dead.
In addition to what others said, you should look at the following,
this may be an answer :
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw/2005-July/001934.html
Regards,
--
Jeremie Le Hen
<
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 20:52:15 -0400 (EDT)
"Mike Jakubik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, September 6, 2005 10:13 am, Paolo Pisati said:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 04:06:57PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> >
> >> during your work with libalias have you found any bugs or buglets, or a
> >> rough
Mike Jakubik (mikej) writes:
>
> And what is the point of all of this when we have OpenBSD's PF? ipfw and
> libalias is dead.
Hmm, I guess you'll have to convince the thousands of people using
ipfw and dummynet out there. I use both PF and IPFW, and both
have their advant
On Tue, September 6, 2005 10:13 am, Paolo Pisati said:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 04:06:57PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>
>> during your work with libalias have you found any bugs or buglets, or a
>> rough places, that should be considered to be merged to main FreeBSD CVS
>> tree as soon as possibl
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 04:06:57PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> during your work with libalias have you found any bugs or buglets,
> or a rough places, that should be considered to be merged to main
> FreeBSD CVS tree as soon as possible, before next release?
well, actually i didn't find any bugs
Paolo,
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:03:48PM +0200, Paolo Pisati wrote:
P> -run as kld in 4.x, 5.x and 6.x (actually it was already working in 6.x)
P> -added log support to libalias kld
P> -integrated with ipfw (nat action added to ipfw)
P> -moved from a monolithic deisgn to a modular one
P> -ever
