From owner-freebsd-config@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 23:31:35 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-config@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313F037B401 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-64-169-107-97.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [64.169.107.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AAF243FB1 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [10.0.0.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 902D166B04; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7839C788; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:33 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Chico Message-ID: <20030813063133.GA52431@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <0b5401c35c56$a8f6df40$0f01010a@lambda> <20030812200556.76245.qmail@web12002.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030812200556.76245.qmail@web12002.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-config@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rule Numbering... X-BeenThere: freebsd-config@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Installation and Configuration List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 06:31:35 -0000 --RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 01:05:56PM -0700, Chico wrote: > I am wondering what the deal is with the Rule > numbering in IPFW? I am switching from IPF to IPFW > because it has more functionality, however I am > confused with the rule numbering scheme. When I read > "how-to's" on the internet people are numbering the > firewall rules in there /etc/ipfw.rules file starting > with 00300, 00301... and then start going to 00400, > 00401, 00402... What the deal with this scheme? Pure arbitrariness. Kris --RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/OdtFWry0BWjoQKURAqwmAKDaXdi6fudITCsSjrjtwdxow8ecQQCeNe6I tdftLyFbkpjAI/8Sbyh2N8E= =FjnR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1--