Re: What is ipfw telling me ?

From: appleseed@hushmail.com
Date: 06/29/01


From: appleseed@hushmail.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:29:52 -0500 (PDT)
To: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg>



>In some respects, probably. Your statement, though, seemed to imply
>that ipfw was not able of keeping track of state, and ipf was.
>That's what I tried to correct.
Nah, I knew what u meant. I was just messing
with u ;-). Ipf is just my personal preference.
northern_
Free, encrypted, secure Web-based email at www.hushmail.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message



Relevant Pages

  • RE: FreeBSD - Secure by DEFAULT ?? [hosts.allow]
    ... But why IPFW? ... IPF is *BSD native wall. ... > hosts.allow file on a FreeBSD Production Server? ... but with no Firewall yet. ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)
  • RE: ipfw or ipf?
    ... I run both IPF and IPFW, ... ports(need to be on the same network as the LAN). ... with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)
  • RE: inet socket restriction via group (fwd)
    ... Yes, but he said ipf, not ipfw.. ... understandings of what he's saying. ... with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)
  • Re: dummynet module?
    ... because ipfw sorts by the explicit rule numbers you supplied, ... function to IPF if you're still concerned about your ipfw rules ... login over the net, or that the system hangs and you can't login from ... check the logs from the console to see what's denying the packets. ...
    (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
  • Re: FreeBSD - Secure by DEFAULT ?? [hosts.allow]
    ... They both exist as part of the base FreeBSD ... both ipf and ipfw are "native" to FreeBSD. ... > native firewall, ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)