Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 06:13:23PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 01:02:10PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: >>> I saw in Tom's recent changes to the roadmap [0] that there will be a >>> version of Shorewall that supports IPv6. Personally, I am not too sure >>> about the name Shorewall6. Though I know that some other projects have >>> done something similar (like tcpdump and tcpdump6). However, I really >>> have no idea what be a good name for the new IPv6-supporting Shorewall. >>> I think that something like Shorewall-ng is probably not good. What >>> will the name be when the next version of IP comes out? >>> >>> I am just thinking off the top of my head, so feel free to modify my >>> idea or tell me that it is no good altogether. >> I can see no compelling reason why ipv6 support would require a >> different piece of software - surely the right solution would be to >> support both ipv4 and ipv6 at the same time. What's the motivation? >> > I am relatively certain that Tom's intent is that there will be a > version of Shorewall that supports both IPv6 *and* IPv4. However, I > don't think that his intent is to retrofit that support into the > structure of the current releases. However, I may just misunderstand. > The statement "First development release of Shorewall6, a Shorewall-like > firewall for IPv6" makes it seem like it might in fact be a separate > tool.
iptables is iptables; ip6tables is ip6tables. The rulesets created using these two utilities are totally independent. So there is no reason to have a single product that produces both configuration. Furthermore, the differences between the two protocols and the differences in capabilities of iptables and ip6tables means that a single compiler would be riddled with separate IPv4/IPv6 logic (as would the documentation). Nevertheless, I've experimented over the last couple of weeks with hacking up the Shorewall-perl compiler so that it could produce both configurations in a single compilation. From these experiments, I've determined that I really don't want to try to do that. So my plan at the moment is to add two new packages: Shorewall6 and Shorewall6-lite. Both will have their own command-line tool (shorewall6 and shorewall6-lite). It is unlikely that Shorewall6 will ever support traffic shaping or multi-ISP. I'm reluctant to repeat either of those mistakes. -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
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
