cvs commit: src/sys/contrib/pf/net if_pflog.c if_pflog.h if_pfsync.c if_pfsync.h pf.c pf_ioctl.c pf_norm.c pf_osfp.c pf_table.c pfvar.h src/sys/contrib/pf/netinet in4_cksum.c

[Wes Peters]

On Friday 27 February 2004 10:23 am, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 06:18:46AM +0000, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> > 
> > We do not plan to remove ipfw or ipfilter at this time nor do we have
> > plans to remove them, until pf receives further evaluation by the
> > user base, there would be no mandate or grounding for such a
> > decision.
>
> If any of ipfw, ipfilter, or ip6fw are candidates for removal, then
> it needs to be done before 5-STABLE is branched.  Otherwise, we need
> to find individuals to actively maintain each of these throughout the
> lifetime of 5.X (a 3 to 5 year time span).

ipfw2 is being actively maintained and developed.  

ipfilter I'm not so sure about, Darren doesn't seem to have been all that 
active lately.  I suspect the locking changes have given him reason to 
hide, he usually prefers to wait until such states of flux have settled 
out before he tries to repair what he sees as damage to ipfilter.  ;^)

Your point about maintenance is well taken.  No action of that magnitued 
would be undertaken without a thorough bikeshed^Wdiscussion on -arch.

-- 

        Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?

Wes Peters                                               wes at softweyr.com