Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 31 Dec 2003 08:12:57 -0500
From:      "fbsd_user" <>
To:        "Will Prater" <>, <>
Subject:   RE: ipf / pf availability in 4.9
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
The post you are replying to tells you pf has been ported to FBSD.

All you had to do is go look for it in the port collection your
here is the direct link.

OpenBSD pf as a kldmodule
Maintained by:
Also listed in: ipv6
Description : Sources : Package : Changes : Download

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Will Prater
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 2:59 AM
Subject: Re: ipf / pf availability in 4.9


Anyone know if there is a way to get PF to port to FreeBSD 4.9?


On Dec 30, 2003, at 7:26 PM, fbsd_user wrote:

> PF has been just ported to FBSD. I don't know if ipf & pf have a
> common code background, but I do know pf & ipf have totally
> different rule processing logic though the rules do look some what
> common. When it comes to using variables on the rule set, that is
> just the normal function of shell processing. Ipfw, ipf, and pf
> all be buried inside of an shell script and perform variable
> substitution.
> In FBSD the rc.conf statement for pointing to the directory
> of the ipf rules can not process a script. You just point that
> rc.conf statement to an empty file just to get the system up. Then
> you have script in the startup application directory that executes
> to load the ipf rules.  Works great.
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:35 PM
> To:
> Subject: ipf / pf
> Hi,
> Here's a question that might seem trivial:
> What's the relationship between the freebsd ipf and the openbsd
> Are they
> the same thing, or are they separately developed branches of a
> common
> codebase?  Or maybe they are totally different.  I ask this
> I was
> looking around for guides for ipf.rules, and some of the openbsd
> examples
> look similar, but some command syntax are different.  The openbsd
> pf.conf
> example had the ability to define variables of ip addresses,
> interface names,
> etc, but it doesn't seem to work with ipf.rules.  Is there any way
> to define
> variables in ipf.rules?
> please cc me in your responses cause I'm not subscribed to the
> thanks so much
> jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> ""
> _______________________________________________
> mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> ""

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>