[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Thu, 31 May 2001, Philipp Buehler wrote:
> > THE LICENSE ON IPF DOESN'T ALLOW OPENBSD TO INCLUDE IT IN THE KERNEL.
> It would allow it, if darren would give a permission to openbsd ..
That's one of my concerns. Darren obviously did know that OpenBSD
included ipf as part of the distributions because it's listed on the
ipfilter home page! I know Darren has commited code and changes to the
FreeBSD CVS, so I'm wondering if he's granted them permission to change
his work. I'm not sure if he has or has not, because as far as I know
he's done all the work himself. This is based off Darren's own postings
to the ipfilter mailing list.
How are the NetBSD folks handling ipf? I'm not sure if it's part of their
kernel or not. If they are finding themselves in the same dillemma, might
it be time for an extending of the olive branch and trying to work on a
new packet filter if that is what is ultimately required? This could turn
into a good thing down the road while it may suck in the short term.
Also, I think it prudent that we move any actual constructive conversation
on the subject to misc@ instead of tech@. Many are becoming annoyed with
the low signal to noise ratio, myself included. Until we have technical
details to talk about, let's take the proposals and other stuff off this
Just my $.02 USD.
Any incoherence is the result of sleep deprivation.
- Re: ipf
- From: Jonathan Walther <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Re: ipf
- From: Philipp Buehler <email@example.com>