Alternative to pf?

[Christopher Petrik]

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:43:59AM +0100, Daniel Engberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> During the year there has been several discussions regarding the state of pf
> in FreeBSD. In most cases it seems to boil down to that it's too
> hard/time-consuming to bring upstream patches from OpenBSD to FreeBSD. As
> it's been mentioned Apple seems to update pf somewhat (copyright is changed
> to 2013 at least) and file size differs between OS X releases but I wasn't
> able to find any commit logs.
> 
> That said, NetBSD have something similar to pf in syntax called npf which
> seems actively maintained and the author seems open to the idea of porting
> it to FreeBSD.
> http://www.netbsd.org/~rmind/pub/npf_asiabsdcon_2014.pdf - Page 24
> However I'm not certain that it surpasses our current pf in terms of
> functionality in all cases (apart from the firewalling ALTQ comes to mind
> etc).
> Perhaps this might be worth looking into and in the end drop pf due to the
> reasons above?
> 
> That said, don't forget all the work that has gone into getting pf where it
> is today.
> While I'm at it, does anyone else than me use ALTQ? While it's not
> multithreaded I find a very good "tool" and it does shaping really well.
> 
> Best regards,
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-pf at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pf-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
Hi,
I think the real question is, "Do we really need so many firewall suites
in FreeBSD" we have ipfw, ipf, pf I think the solution would be to port
npf as it's bases is to be portable. I use it and it takes some getting
used to but it looks promising. But then this creates a 4th suite to add
into FreeBSD ?

Chris
-- 
In Tennessee, it is illegal to shoot any game other than whales from a
moving automobile.
Mutt Version: 1.5.23
OS Version: NetBSD 6.1.5
Hostname: netbsd.bsdjunk.com