Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:25:06 +0200 From: Roelof Osinga <roelof@nisser.com> To: Marc Silver <marcs@draenor.org> Cc: Steve Coles <scoles@tripos.com>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Relative merits of IPFIREWALL and IPFILTER Message-ID: <39414492.ACFF042A@nisser.com> References: <0f4a01bfd229$00605ab0$4c9814ac@volga.TRIPOS.COM> <39413FFB.85A522F6@nisser.com> <20000609211149.C81376@draenor.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marc Silver wrote:
>
> errr, nope. :) ipfw can handle stateful stuff :)
Hey, interesting. I've always gathered that to be the distinguishing
feature between them. I mean - from ipf(5) - ipfw doesn't do
state keeps information about the flow of a communication
session. State can be kept for TCP, UDP, and ICMP
packets.
this. Ipfw sees each packet as a distinct entity. But if that
has changed while I was asleep, so more the better. I'm
using ipfw, you see <g>.
Roelof
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eboa (ingenieursburo Office Automation) web. http://eboa.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39414492.ACFF042A>