From owner-freebsd-current  Thu Jun 27 19:23:51 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA24970
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 19:23:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from post.io.org (post.io.org [198.133.36.6])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA24942;
          Thu, 27 Jun 1996 19:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zap.io.org (taob@zap.io.org [198.133.36.81]) by post.io.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA18354; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:19:44 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:20:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Tao <taob@io.org>
To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
cc: current@FreeBSD.org, phk@FreeBSD.org, alex@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: IPFW (mis)feature
In-Reply-To: <199606280135.TAA12732@rocky.mt.sri.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.92.960627221935.8514B-100000@zap.io.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 27 Jun 1996, Nate Williams wrote:
>
> Why doesn't ipfw(8) allow me to specify the services using the names
> out of /etc/services?

    Funny, I was *just* about to ask the exact same question, after
fiddling with our new firewall for a couple of hours today.  As it is
now, I have comments in rc.firewall, but an 'ipfw l' is difficult to
parse, even with only a few of the well-known services enabled.
--
Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org, taob@ican.net)
Systems and Network Administrator, Internet Canada Corp.
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"