Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 18:29:48 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 206934] MFC of commits r272695 and r288529 Message-ID: <bug-206934-2472-zj8GPO9NMK@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-206934-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-206934-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D206934 --- Comment #4 from mgrooms@shrew.net --- Thanks for the clarification regarding enc. I'm not trying to make more work for developers, I'm just trying to prevent other users from experiencing the same problems I have. Here is some background: While upgrading a pair of firewalls to 10, I went through a week of crashes= and scrambling to apply kernel patches from head ... https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2014-October/040170.html Before upgrading to 10.2-RELEASE, I went through all patches I had previous= ly applied to see if they had been MFCd. Regardless, when I upgraded I still w= ent through two days of crashes and applying kernel patches from head ... https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mailing.freebsd.stable/8ZYiHDkarhU The other patch that fixed my 10.2 problem was MFCd with RE approval two da= ys ago ... https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D206933 The only other patches that looked like they may not have MFCd were the two mentioned in this bugzilla ticket. After all the adventures I've had upgrad= ing 10.x firewalls, I felt I would be remiss if I didn't follow up with a reque= st. I appreciate all the work you and other developers do on FreeBSD. IMO, it's= the best alternative to proprietary firewall systems that support stateful fail-over. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-206934-2472-zj8GPO9NMK>