Subject: Re: why no pfsync in NetBSD?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Charlie Allom <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/20/2007 13:14:52
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:58:59 -0500 (CDT), Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Charlie Allom wrote:
>> I am looking for the reasoning behind *not* importing pfsync into
> The http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/network/pf.html webpage (and )
> says: "pfsync(4) is not supported (due to protocol number assignment
> issues). This will hopefully be solved in a future release."
> I don't know when that protocol number assignment issue will be resolved.
> Some details about this is documented in the OpenBSD lyrics page at
> http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#35 (search for "request was denied").
> OpenBSD and FreeBSD use (for /etc/protocols):
> pfsync 240 PFSYNC # PF Synchronization
> which is apparently in the unassigned range.
> I recall CARP had same issue, but that got committed. NetBSD's
> /etc/services has:
> carp 112 CARP vrrp # Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol
Googling through the mailing lists and CVS checkins, there is no clear
word on why this is. I'm glad there now is. I am frustrated by it - I
thought perhaps someone had decided that using an 'illegally assigned'
IP # was ok, but an unassigned was not.
> Can you port over the OpenBSD pfsync code so we can test your patches?
> (Also see FreeBSD's pfsync code so you can see their ifdefs.)
I'd love to.. :) but I'm not your man.
> Jeremy C. Reed
> <shameless plug>
> </shameless plug>
<shamelessly left in/>