Re: ipfilter(4) needs maintainer

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 02:15:36PM +0400, Lev Serebryakov wrote:

> >> Yes! This is the most clever thought in this thread. Why we need 3
> >> firewalls? Two packet filters it's excess too. We have two packet filters:
> >> one with excellent syntax and functionality but with outdated bandwidth
> >> control mechanism (aka ALTQ); another - with nice traffic
> >> shaper/prioritization (dummynet)/classification (diffused) but with
> >> complicated implementation  in not trivial tasks. May be the next step
> >> will be discussion about one packet filter in the system?..
> 
> MM> ... and as far as I can tell none of them is currently usable
> MM> on an IPv6-only FreeBSD (like protecting a host with sshguard),
> MM> none of them supports stateful NAT64, nor IPv6 prefix translation :(
>  IPv6 prefix translation?! AGAIN!? FML. I've thought, that IPv6 will
> render all that NAT nightmare to void. I hope, IPv6 prefix translation
> will not be possible never ever!

You disallow anonymization? NAT do anonymisation also.
_______________________________________________
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"