It is with regret that I announce that Shorewall development and support is
officially ended.
Sean's post has finally driven it home to me that in the long term, trying
to support a project like Shorewall is impossible for a person of my
personality and age.
Sean -- please believe that this isn't about you or your post -- your post
was just the proverbial straw on this old camel's back.
Unlike the originators of other successful open source projects, I have not
been able to attract a core of people who believe in Shorewall and who are
willing to make sacrifices to ensure it's success. That is my weakness and I
accept it. But is means that I have been left with trying to develop,
document, and support Shorewall almost single-handedly. I cannot do it any more.
I have apparently been able to create the illusion of more success than has
been achieved. Sean believes that he should be able to ignore the notices on
the Shorewall 1.3 web site announcing that support for that release has
ceased and thinks that the errata page should still have updated Shorewall
components for a release that my 60 year old mind can't remember most of the
details about. And he is right to expect that. But I can't deliver it.
And I just cannot deal with the support and documentation frustration any
more -- support, the documentation and the web site consume an order of
magnitude more of my time than does Shorewall development. Apparently, I am
completely inept at web site design because people just can't find the
information that they need; and I have no more energy to try to fix it.
Since I began developing Shorewall:
a) I have gained over 60 pounds in weight.
b) My lawn and landscaping have become an embarrassment in the neighborhood.
c) I have begun exhibiting addictive behavior toward Linux and Shorewall.
d) I have developed sleep disorders (I use a breathing aid at night)
e) I dislike my life.
It's time to get myself cleaned up and re-enter the life of the living.
I will leave the Shorewall website and server in place until July 4 in case
there is any community interest in picking up the pieces. Please email me
privately if you are interested in carrying on; I'll do what I can to help.
Tonight I am deleting myself from all of the Shorewall and Leaf mailing lists.
I will clean up what I have for a 2.3 release and place it on the server as
the last Shorewall release -- Shorewall 2.4.0.
I would like to express my appreciation for all who have used Shorewall and
who have enriched my life through Shorewall. I especially appreciate:
- Steve Cowles who helped me so much in the early days
- Francesca Smith who picked up the sample configurations when I had had it
with them
- Mike Noyes who was always willing to help improve the documentation.
I regret letting down those of you who depend on Shorewall. But look at it
this way -- you have the source for all of the code that you run and it's
all written in a very simple programming language. And there was always the
possiblilty that I would walk in front of a bus.
... and you have to admit that the price was right :-)
Shorewall will always be a part of my life that I look back on with fondness.
As always,
-Tom
--
Tom Eastep\ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key
--- Begin Message ---
Tom,
Tom Eastep wrote:
> Sean Covel wrote:
>
>>I looked under errata for 1.3.14 and the rfc1918 file that was there was
>>old. I guess that one is more up-to-date.
>>
>
>
> Sean -- There is one up-to-date rfc1918 file for Shorewall versions up to
> 2.0.1 linked from the top of the errata page. Do you actually think I have
> enough spare time to prepare separate updated rfc1918 files (which have the
> same contents) for each of the dozens of Shorewall releases that included
> Bogon address ranges in that file? Especially Shorewall releases that have
> not been supported for over two years (Hint: 1.3.14 falls into that
> category)??
>
Since I'm not a Shorewall developer, I assumed I should look under the
errata for the version of Shorewall I was using. How am I to know that
every version of Shorewall from xxx to yyy had exactly the same format
for the rfc1918 file?
> Do you actually believe that the list of "bad" IP addresses is dependent on
> which verison of Shorewall your are running? Please THINK when you sit down
> to your computer.
Ouch! Having a bad day?
Obviously "bad" IP addresses are not Shorewall version dependant, but
are rfc1918 files? How should I know? Besides, I went to the
Shorewall site, clicked on the version I am running, then clicked on the
errata for that version. Is this what I did wrong? Perhaps if that
rfc1918 was a link to the one you maintained we wouldn't be having this
discussion...
>
> And for your other question, I aggregate adjacent ranges whereas the IANA
> lists them separately.
>
Th
