Subject: Re: PF and Darren Reed
To: Miles Nordin <carton@Ivy.NET>
From: Jim Wise <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/18/2004 14:20:15
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Miles Nordin wrote:
>At this Thursday's Beer Meeting I'd like to discuss what to do about
>Darren Reed. I am really pissed about his attitude in tech-net, and I
>think the way he's interacting with itojun is impolite, unfair, and
>most importantly not in our best interest.
>The thread I've been reading is in tech-net starting at 2003-06-26.
>It's long, so probably you don't want to read all of it. I'll try to
>print it and bring a highlighted copy.
You may be mailing to the wrong list -- several people here have run
afoul of itojun's crusade to adopt OpenBSD changes wholesale and without
review, and also of itojun's bull-headedness in importing things without
- -- or even against -- a clear consensus (a bull-headedness which has
more than once resulted in major user-visible breaks in code ranging
from cgd to kerberos to openssl). I'm sure I am _far_ from the only one
here who believes that Darren is more or less in the right in the thread
As to your other two points, it would take far more than a ``little
bit'' of beer to get pretty much _anyone_ here enthusiastic about the
idea of replacing IPF with PF, given that PF is a worse implementation
of less functionality, and it might take almost as much beer to convince
anyone that ALTQ could not be made to work with IPF (something even
itojun doesn't claim).
That's my 2 cents anyway.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----