Re: Proxy server, mode intercept on NetBSD 7.0.1

[metalliqaz%fastmail.fm@localhost]

This has me a little worried.  ipfilter has served me well for a long
time and I planned to continue using it.  Comments from christos and
dholland seem to indicate that only npf has a future.  So many
questions...

Is ipf going to be removed in a future release?  Did npf launch because
ipf was abandoned by its author? (or the other way around?)  Will npf
eventually replicate all the features of ipf and/or pf?

My impression of npf is that it scales much better as a firewall, but
lacks the NAT and traffic shaping features I use at home.  Is this out
of date?



On Wed, Aug 3, 2016, at 03:16 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article
> <1470085391.2331984.683025593.376EE850%webmail.messagingengine.com@localhost>,
>  <metalliqaz%fastmail.fm@localhost> wrote:
> >Me butthurt?  That's comical.  You just wrote the most butthurt email
> >I've ever seen on the mailing lists, and that's saying something.
> >
> >My point, and I think it was pretty clear, is that NetBSD has long been
> >stable for me but suddenly requires an uncharacteristic amount of fixing
> >for a stable release.  I have the crash dumps to prove it.  If this
> >thread is any suggestion, I'm not the only one with ipfilter woes.
> >
> >You seem to take personal offense to this revelation and went full-on
> >Internet Tough Guy(TM).  That's the definition of butthurt.   Why do you
> >find this so personally insulting?  Perhaps you should talk it through
> >with a therapist.  It may help you.
> 
> Well, I have been trying to fix some of the ipf issues on 7 with some
> success.
> I think that the problem is that most of us have switched to npf, and so
> ipf
> is not getting a lot of testing. Perhaps you can try switching too? I
> prefer
> that you switch, and we are willing to help you do so, rather than
> spending
> time to fix ipf.
> 
> christos
>