Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 21:34:34 +0200 From: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pf is MPSAFE? Message-ID: <200505092134.40941.max@love2party.net> In-Reply-To: <427FB6D7.90208@corp.grupos.com.br> References: <427FB6D7.90208@corp.grupos.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart2223137.WKXsoehL7m Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 09 May 2005 21:15, Marcus Grando wrote: > pf is MPSAFE in 5.4-RELEASE? I change ipfilter to pf because ipfilter > have LOR in 5.4. But i don't know if pf is MPSAFE. Yes. There is one exception with user/group rules for udp/tcp connections= =20 originating for the gateway itself, though. This is described in the=20 pf.conf(5) manual page's BUGS section. ipfilter does not have this feature= =20 at all, so this should not be a regression for you. =2D-=20 /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News --nextPart2223137.WKXsoehL7m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBCf7tQXyyEoT62BG0RAjC4AJ9jPbjWFg529H8xH/GE8Df8VMVhjwCeOdTb T+3D8FExQ15F169k9IP/ULI= =w9GH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2223137.WKXsoehL7m--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200505092134.40941.max>