From owner-freebsd-security Sun Jul 30 21:53:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from superconductor.rush.net (superconductor.rush.net [208.9.155.8]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49DBD37BA56 for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 21:53:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from trish@bsdunix.net) Received: from localhost (trish@localhost) by superconductor.rush.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA05533; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:53:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:53:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Siobhan Patricia Lynch X-Sender: trish@superconductor.rush.net To: Darren Reed Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipf or ipfw (was: log with dynamic firewall rules) In-Reply-To: <200007310447.OAA19094@cairo.anu.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org because I'm bridging.... this may just be hearsay, but evidently ipf doesn;t work with freebsd and bridging, I have the "firewall" on one wire into the arrowpoint. -Trish __ Trish Lynch FreeBSD - The Power to Serve trish@bsdunix.net Rush Networking trish@rush.net On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Darren Reed wrote: > In some mail from Siobhan Patricia Lynch, sie said: > > > > > > Just so Darren doesn't have to say it: maybe I should spend my time > > > looking into ipfilter instead of trying to hack ipfw. > > > > > > > it definitely depends on what you are doing, in my case ipfw was > > pretty much the *only* choice. > > because...? > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message