From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Feb  1  6:42:15 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from ns1.hutchtel.net (ns1.hutchtel.net [206.9.112.100])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0075A37B67D
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu,  1 Feb 2001 06:41:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mark9.vladsempire.net (hutch-178.hutchtel.net [206.10.67.78])
	by ns1.hutchtel.net (8.9.1/8.9.0) with SMTP id IAA10492;
	Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:41:38 -0600 (CST)
From: Josh Paetzel <jpaetzel@hutchtel.net>
To: Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net>,
	"Cliff Sarginson" <cliff@raggedclown.net>, <darryl@osborne-ind.com>,
	<freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: ppp packet filtering
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:39:22 +0000
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28]
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset=""
References: <E14OGzs-0000MW-00@post.mail.nl.demon.net>
In-Reply-To: <E14OGzs-0000MW-00@post.mail.nl.demon.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <01020108404102.01820@mark9.vladsempire.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu, 01 Feb 2001, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
> > 
> > Personally I use natd and ipfw if I have a static IP to deal with.  
> Interesting, may I ask why ?
> I have a static IP (but only a DOD modem connection)
> 

I find the rules for ipfw have more power and flexibility than the
rules for ppp.  I am also more familiar with them.

Josh


> Cliff
> 
> If I
> > am dealing with a dynamic IP I use ppp -nat and packet filtering.  I would
> > use ipfw with dynamic IP, but I haven't figured out a way to deal with the
> > dynamic IP, so I belive that ppp filtering is the only recourse that you
> > have.
> > 


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