Talk:IPFilter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
 
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-Class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

"Ipfilter in P2P - File Sharing

Recently many filesharing programs got in their features one dedicated to filter ips range or single ip which are unwanted and undesired . There are programs working exclusively on banning ips range from the internet connection of users , acting like a firewall , it's the case of Peerguardian and Protowall . Unconvenient with this last choice is that users won't be able to see everything that's hosted or is running over the ips range banned, just like sites or other services ."


This seems out of place. There is a differance between Ipfilter the program and the technique of ip filtering. This does not belong in this article.

License[edit]

At first glance, the license looks a lot like BSD Licenses, ut does not allow redistribution of modified versions.

This is not true... the license allows distribution of both modified and unmodified versions (according to the linked license text at the references section). It only says it must be distributed under the same conditions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.0.198.173 (talk) 22:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

  • If I remember, a former stricter license not allowing modified distribution was previously used, but the author relaxed the license over time. 66.11.179.30 (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


Here's how it appears in the NetBSD source tree. It looks like BSD but not quite. Definitely not GPL at least, as claimed in the article.

The CVS history actually says it was at one point licensed under the GPL but it's now BSD-ish. --88.113.162.167 (talk) 13:03, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

/*
 * Copyright (C) 2012 by Darren Reed.
 *
 * The author accepts no responsibility for the use of this software and
 * provides it on an ``as is'' basis without express or implied warranty.
 *
 * Redistribution and use, with or without modification, in source and binary
 * forms, are permitted provided that this notice is preserved in its entirety
 * and due credit is given to the original author and the contributors.
 *
 * The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or
 * derivative of this code cannot be changed. i.e. this code cannot simply be
 * copied, in part or in whole, and put under another distribution licence
 * [including the GNU Public Licence.]
 *
 * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
 * ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
 * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
 * ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
 * FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
 * DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
 * OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
 * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
 * LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
 * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
 * SUCH DAMAGE.
 *
 * I hate legalese, don't you ?
 */
This is the correct license since 1993. Note that Darren was working for Sun. BTW: OpenSolaris mentions: "Copyright (C) 1993-2003 by Darren Reed." in the 2010 version of this file. Schily (talk) 13:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Most of the given sources are defunct, but the Internet Archive helps. If he was working for Sun, one might suppose it would have Sun's copyright notice. Checking, there is a source available here, for ip-fil3.4.9.tar.gz, whose HISTORY file mentions
# Thanks to Craig Bishop of connect.com.au and Sun Microsystems for the         
# loan of a machine to work on a Solaris 2.x port of this software.   
but nowhere mentions employment by Sun Microsystems. The license in this older version differs:
/*
 * Copyright (C) 1998-2000 by Darren Reed & Guido van Rooij.
 *
 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted
 * provided that this notice is preserved and due credit is given
 * to the original author and the contributors.
 */
and because OpenSolaris' history does not extend before 2005, comments about its content before that time are speculative. TEDickey (talk) 16:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
If you did carefully read the statements, you could have been a bit more polite... The discussion is about whether the claims on the netbsd repository are aligned with other available sources and for this discussion, there is no need to look at the time before 2005. For the time in question, I know that Darren was a Sun employee as I met him at various parties and meetings where he was very obvious about his employment... Schily (talk) 17:25, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Look again - I am being polite. Most readers would process your comment sequentially, and not try to guess at the parts you omitted. What you said:
This is the correct license since 1993. Note that Darren was working for Sun. 
prompted me to look up at the quoted license, see that it did not mention 1993, and look for a license which did cite 1993 (done). The unqualified statement that Darren was working for Sun (without mentioning the timeframe) was in the context of your comment about 1993. Taking those (and the earlier license, which did refer to 1993), prompted my comment that he was not working for Sun during the earlier period when a 1993 copyright date was cited. Darren's blog at Sun started March 9, 2005, ended March 16, 2011, which gives a rough idea when he was employed by Sun. But none of that was mentioned on this talk page (or in the related topic). There's also the omitted information from 2001-2005, which probably is topical, but at the moment unrelated to the discussion we are having. (By the way, I found nothing to substantiate the comment about GPL). TEDickey (talk) 01:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
If you read the NetBSD CVS, you may notice that it is not the IPFilter developers' CVS - NetBSD imported a snapshot (from somewhere) which gives no clues to its earlier history. Since the "upstream" development appears defunct, it's left for some reliable source author to make sense of the fragments and piece together a story. Wikipedia is not the place to do that (it is called original research). TEDickey (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
If you don't like "original research", don do it... Schily (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
The ip_fil5.0.6.tar.gz file available from sourceforge is identical to the licence quoted above except it's Copyright (C) 1993-2001 by Darren Reed.
NetBSD's IPFilter is newer, 5.1.2 (2012-07-22).
I can't access any relevant page using the wayback machine for some reason, so can't check those.
Anyway, I'm removing the 'GPLv2' claim found in the article body text, as it seems to be patently untrue. --88.113.162.167 (talk) 12:10, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Here we have Darren Reed himself saying that he imported the source code into the NetBSD source tree. He's a NetBSD developer. He's still on that mailing list, with last post in August 2014, so you can possibly ask him. --88.113.162.167 (talk) 12:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)