On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:14:16AM -0800, Scott Ellis wrote:
> Good summary, Miles.  That's how I remember the email threads going as well.
> 
> While the folks maintaining the pflkm have been doing a great job with getting
> ALTQ support integrated into the LKM, users who don't want to, or cannot, go
> the LKM route are losing out.  Given the lack of (visible) progress on this
> over the past year, it seems silly to keep depriving users of the option while
> the ALTQ-API panacea fails to materialize.
> 
> Obviously (based on the pflkm mailing list, and occasional threads on the
> NetBSD lists, like this one), there's interest from users out there.
> 

For -current users, this might be interested:
http://nedbsd.nl/~ppostma/pf/altq-current.diff

This is basically the same patch as from the pflkm, it's only diffed
against another tree.  I'll try to keep this patch up to date until
something is going to happen with the ALTQ-API...

-- 
Peter Postma