3 ms·

I hope they rewrote the pf rule syntax yet again so I get to go around rewriting every ruleset for every pf firewall I’ve deployed and all the books and documen

I hope they rewrote the pf rule syntax yet again so I get to go around rewriting every ruleset for every pf firewall I’ve deployed and all the books and documentation on pf can be obsolete. /s

UI_at_80x24 6y ago
As far as I remember they last did that when the OBSD 5.x branch was launched. Since then it's been stable. Or atleast my rule-setd are simplistic enough that I haven't noticed.
kelp 6y ago
There are some minor tweaks to what port range syntax is acceptable: https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html
1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago
Has anyone ever tried to propose a "universal" firewall syntax. Like an "intermediate representation" that can then be translated into the syntax for any version of any firewall software. Obviously it would not work as a 1:1 translation for every rule. There are things that one program can do that another cannot. Even something pre-pf like ipf still has some yet-to-be duplicated functionality. However there are many commonalities between all these programs.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]