From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 19 23:54:51 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1F9DAFE; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 23:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-x230.google.com (mail-pa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A45BE2AE0; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 23:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id et14so7539856pad.35 for ; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 16:54:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+wRvSZP+qP464DuFKOk6jKLAvAdDgyn24FfM7RspSd8=; b=R5R2PXr2PhkmCTrLxAueQzd8HkXqooFclxY7JJ4VRlJGW05HTNH8VzLGqlmconcXc/ HBGQQW0xI6lWpDiP+hrUHjfnd4j8cnW9ZBi/2JD1h3nrObEPvoSUPyhfvOotCumbx1MI YSTD0LkM5jGEKW0aCqV6Hm3QZPUwFggt92q9fd7sG81g6d8fECIG4Xb1lzcQ7TmzeVJi dUUvQhMJ05de+AeajODFzL376NsGwqdyXDk3oarjqeT+e+r9EIE7+Fk7VqRQKVrlv1+D 9TS87uKW9dUKOpmOGGfpNbE+Upc3S0Xt57ZUsYxoh6Uuq5A02HgRoZjnsZbaXJnsMoKS qPOQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.70.100.131 with SMTP id ey3mr15061679pdb.60.1405814091095; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 16:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.66.88.227 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 16:54:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8E7D9358-29BA-48F9-9067-1BBA48470673@FreeBSD.org> References: <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk> <20140718110645.GN87212@FreeBSD.org> <53C9DAA1.4020006@bluerosetech.com> <8E7D9358-29BA-48F9-9067-1BBA48470673@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 16:54:50 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6coVMr44UhW_ofTMas96O2ds5ao Message-ID: Subject: Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ? From: Kevin Oberman To: Mark Felder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18 Cc: Mailinglists FreeBSD , Gleb Smirnoff , Darren Pilgrim , Andreas Nilsson , Current FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 23:54:52 -0000 On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Mark Felder wrote: > > On Jul 19, 2014, at 3:35, Andreas Nilsson wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Darren Pilgrim < > > list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> wrote: > > > >> On 7/18/2014 4:06 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > >> > >>> K> b) We are a major release away from OpenBSD (5.6 coming soon) - is > >>> K> following OpenBSD's pf the past? - should it be? > >>> > >>> Following OpenBSD on features would be cool, but no bulk imports > >>> would be made again. Bulk imports produce bad quality of port, > >>> and also pf in OpenBSD has no multi thread support. > >>> > >> > >> I would much rather have a slower pf that actually supports modern > >> networking than a faster one I can't use due to showstopper flaws and > >> missing features. > >> > > > > So would I. Not that we use pf, but anyway. > > > >> > >> There is currently no viable firewall module for FreeBSD if you want to > do > >> things like route IPv6. > > > > > > Isn't that possible with ipfw? > > > > Perhaps the pf guys in OpenBSD could be convinced to start openpf and > have > > porting layer as in openzfs. > > > > I do not know ipfw IPv6 limitations, but the Wikipedia article says: > > * IPv6 support (with several limitations) > > > Choice is nice, but I would like to see the project promote one firewall > to users. My coworkers long ago jumped ship from ipfw to pf and I know > regret that decision due to the IPv6 bugs. At this point it's too hard to > migrate all the servers off of pf. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > I believe that this is obsolete, at least with 10. It certainly used to be the case in older versions. I suspect the improved ipfw is now in 9.3 and perhaps even 8.4, but I can't swear to it. I do know that the 10.0 version broke several of my firewall rules which would have made back-porting to older versions unacceptable but I believe that this is no longer the case. Some IPv6 specific keywords had been eliminated, but I think that they are all back in place, now. No longer required, but there for compatibility. The last feature I am aware of that lacked ipv6 support was tables. If any more exist, they are subtle and I have not hit hem to this point. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com