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) ? Personally I would be happy if we shipped with a PF/ALTQ enabled kernel on the install media as we did with MP kernels before. -- Adam
Attachment:
pgpdgr0W95c0K.pgp
Description: PGP signature