>] 	it was because ALTQ-on-1.6 inclueded its own packet classifier (which
>] 	is very similar to packet filter).  in the way of ALTQ development,
>] 	ALTQ dropped its classifier and chose to rely on packet tagging
>] 	(provided by PF), because ALTQ classifier is basically a code
>] 	duplication of packet filter.
>So they decided to eliminate the ability to choose which packet
>filter the end user may utilize for the sake of skipping out on some
>work by piggybacking onto a codebase that is decidedly foreign to
>the NetBSD tree.

	no, that's not true.  we could ship NetBSD including both ipfilter
	and PF (you can multiple packet filter implementation with a single OS,
	see freebsd - they have been shipping ipfilter and ipfw for a long
	time).
	then you can
	- run packet filter by ipfilter
	- control ALTQ by PF

	so no harm was done to you.

itojun