pf(4) status in 7.0-R

Gergely CZUCZY phoemix at harmless.hu
Sun Jun 3 16:49:21 UTC 2007


On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:43:10PM +0800, LI Xin wrote:
> Max Laier wrote:
> [...]
> > How do people feel about removing ftp-proxy from the base altogether?  I 
> > think it's better off in ports anyway.  Opinions?
I would vote for including pftpx (the newer version in OpenBSD) iirc.
Almost a year ago I've made an ftp service where the ftpd was jailed to
a local IP address, and i had to use ftp-proxy for this propose. This
reverse-proxying stuff couldn't be achived with the ftp-proxy in
base, so i had to use the later version, which has the name pftpx
in the ports tree. I'd vote for replacing ftp-proxy with pftpx.
> 
> /me vote for this.
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Xin LI <delphij at delphij.net>	http://www.delphij.net/
> FreeBSD - The Power to Serve!
> 



Bye,

Gergely Czuczy
mailto: gergely.czuczy at harmless.hu

-- 
Weenies test. Geniuses solve problems that arise.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1162 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20070603/a1b8bea7/attachment.pgp


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list