Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: ALTqd vs PF/ALTQ

Altq worked with pf when I last used in in NetBSD.

Swift Griggs wrote:

I noticed that in 4.0 PF+ALTQ is a non-starter. Pf works great (provided you use the lkm or compile it in), but altq rules in /etc/pf.conf just elicit the same old error about lack of kernel support. I did, of course, recompile the kernel to support all the ALTQ_* options. However, I did so with the suspicion that this was only for the gratification of the the userspace altqd. My suspicion was confirmed as soon as I booted the new kernel. Altqd worked, pf+altq didn't. I actually have no problem with altqd whatsoever. I've managed to make it do everything I need. I've also got no problem using ipfilter over pf, either. I could simply care less about the whole Darren Reed license hoopla. If I had a fairy-wish, I guess like to see someone brighter than myself the do enough to the altq.conf(5) page to be able to remove the BUG section that reads: "This man page is incomplete. For more information read the source.". I was able to glean what I needed from the source, but others might not fare as well. Not seeing a mention of altq in the NetBSD Guide makes me think there is still some question about what exactly the future of altq is.

Moving right along, what is the plan for 5.0 ? Will all permutations be supported (pf+altq, pf+altqd, even ipf + pf-altq) ? I just want to know where my energy is best spent if I want to fully master altq syntax for the next-gen NetBSD (/etc/pf.conf or /etc/altq.conf) ?



John R. Shannon

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index