OpenBSD Journal

PF Wiki (new)

Contributed by jose on from the rules-compendium dept.

Well, people ask all the time for help and suggestions in their PF rulesets, and even Daniel had a good suggestion on that topic:
Maybe a Wiki like http://www.obsd.pronym.org/wiki/ would be simpler, people could just put their rulesets on a page and others could edit them and add comments inline.
So, someone went ahead and make the OpenBSD PF Ruleset Wiki , or the Compendium Of PF Rules. It's just getting off the ground, so only a few exmples are in there, but you can certainly contribute and make this a valuable resource. There is also the OpenBSD Wiki which is a nice place to store information, as well.

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By Anonymous Coward () on

    oh. new 'bookmarks' addition. :)

  2. By Anonymous Coward () on

    oh. new 'bookmarks' addition. :)

  3. By Anonymous Coward () on

    Just from browsing around, it seems you can edit/delete/add anything you want on the pages, and it isn't marked differently as a comment or whatnot...wouldn't it be clearer/easier to mark people's comments in a different color and timestamp them? Maybe this is how a wiki is truly supposed to work, but it feels clunky and ackward to follow the progress of one of the pf logs.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Yeah, what would be cool (imho) would be that there's a list of pf configs, with description, and then each of them has a tree of newer versions under it.
      So you can choose something from the list of descriptions that looks interesting, and then you'll see a tree of timestamped, commented changes (a bit like cvsweb, but threaded, so that one pf config can be taken different ways),...
      Oh well, it's probably too much work (I wouldn't know, because I wouldn't be able to program such a thing :( Maybe I should shut up and learn how to do it myself...)

    2. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Unfortunately that's precisely the way Wikis are supposed to work. I don't like it either :-( It's great for the anarchy/GNU people who want everyone to have their say, but unless the only people who contribute are particularly intelligent it doesn't seem to make as much sense as a moderated entry.

      Comments

      1. By Antifa.NET () on

        If you don't like it then go contribute elsdewhere?

        > It's great for the anarchy/GNU people who want everyone to have their say, but unless the only people who contribute are particularly intelligent it doesn't seem to make as much sense as a moderated entry.


        Protecting people from influence and only giving influence to a minor group is only done by insecurity and by the lack of trust in the users of the site. Unfortunately, that 'moderation way' does invite the will and oppurtunity to share knowledge far less then a system like Wiki.

        Wouldn't it be cool when everyone who wanted would be trusted and would have read/write access to CVS?

    3. By JoshJore () josh@lavendergreens.org on mailto:josh@lavendergreens.org

      That is exactly how a wiki works. If you want to follow changes then you have to look at the revision history for the page. Its common courtesy to note changes and the author but all in all - any change to any page is fair game.

  4. By Justin () on

    I am glad I am not a MS junkie or I would be missing out on so much. This is just another cool example of how the free flow of information is important and valuable. OpenBSD is really made a home out of my computers.

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]