Re: Removing PF

[maya%netbsd.org@localhost]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 02:43:22PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 2:29 PM Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> wrote:
> 
> > Le 30/03/2019 à 20:26, Michael van Elst a écrit :
> > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 08:10:21PM +0100, Maxime Villard wrote:
> > >
> > >> ... sure, meanwhile you didn't really answer to the core of the issue,
> > which
> > >> I think was stated clearly by Sevan ...
> > >
> > > The issue is that we need to work on npf before we can drop other code.
> >
> > ... the questions raised were: why would someone use an insecure firewall?
> > ...
> > and isn't it irresponsible to provide an insecure firewall? ... you still
> > fail to answer ... I see fewer and fewer reasons to keep talking to you,
> > given your clear inability to answer in good faith ...
> >
> 
> Also, this is a plan to depreciate, not remove from the tree tomorrow.
> Declaring it for all to see that it is a rotting, festering caucus is a
> good thing. Maybe, it will spur someone to fix that. Extremely unlikely,
> but possible. It does let the users know with enough time to migrate and/or
> enhance npf to meet their needs. It starts to break the log jam that has
> lead to three under supported firewalls in the tree.
> 
> Warner
> 
> >

PF(4)                        Device Drivers Manual                       PF(4)
...

DESCRIPTION
     The NetBSD version of PF is obsolete, and its use is strongly
     discouraged.  Use npf(7) instead.


We had this in the previous N discussions of deleting them.