Re: ipfilter(4) needs maintainer

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Lev Serebryakov <lev_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> Hello, Kimmo.
> You wrote 15 апреля 2013 г., 14:26:40:
>
>>> MM> ... and as far as I can tell none of them is currently usable
>>> MM> on an IPv6-only FreeBSD (like protecting a host with sshguard),
>>> MM> none of them supports stateful NAT64, nor IPv6 prefix translation :(
>>>  IPv6 prefix translation?! AGAIN!? FML. I've thought, that IPv6 will
>>> render all that NAT nightmare to void. I hope, IPv6 prefix translation
>>> will not be possible never ever!
>
> KP> Things like ftp-proxy(8) will need address translation even with IPv6.
>   ftp-proxy is solution to help IPv4 NAT. Why do we need it when every
> device could have routable IPv6? Of course, _every_ device should be
> protected by border firewall (stateful and IPv6-enabled), but FTP
> server should have special rules for it to allow traffic pass, not
> some "proxy".
>
>  And, yes, NAT64 will be useful for sure, but it is another story,
> not IPv6<->IPv6 translation.
>

You're forgetting set ups where outgoing traffic is controlled by
filter rules, outgoing passive mode ftp needs help from the proxy to
open holes for arbitrary ports. This is not limited to IPv4 and NAT.

-Kimmo