Comments on: New ipfw in DragonFly

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:13:18 +0000

without the rule numbering, you probably cannot need to reload the firewall rules when you need to make some changes. you cannot make it on the fly cause you cannot specify where to insert/delete

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:18:04 +0000

Simple stupid questions.
AFAIK IPFW requires rule numbering which is horrible idea IMHO (reminds me BASIC). So IPFW3 also requires rule numbering?
What about NAT and traffic shaping?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:15:36 +0000

here we got the document, i think with ipfw’s experience , it should be easy to use.
http://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/ipfw2/

By: New sshlockout option – DragonFly BSD Digest

New sshlockout option – DragonFly BSD Digest — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:26:24 +0000

[…] a side effect of the new ipfw3 import, the sshlockout script included with DragonFly now has -pf and -ipfw […]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 03:14:50 +0000

As a side note, dillon mentioned you have to load a few different modules in order to use the new ipfw3, so we should make sure that it’s documented which ones those are and that people are aware of it in the event that they want to use it, I don’t remember what they were off the top of my head though, but I’m sure dillon and bill would know.

By: Justin Sherrill

Justin Sherrill — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:52:49 +0000

It’s already an alternative; it’s committed and usable. How usable is something we’ll have to just find out by using it.

By: Javi

Javi — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 04:28:01 +0000

Nice, is this eventually going to be Dragonfly’s native alternative to pf?