Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:17:32 -0800 (PST) From: David Raistrick <drais@wow.atlasta.net> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Firewall config non-intuitiveness Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201281211070.22070-100000@wow.atlasta.net> In-Reply-To: <15445.44102.288461.155113@caddis.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Nate Williams wrote: > > Note that "do not enable firewall" (which is implied by firewall_enable="NO") > > is *not* equivalent to "disable firewall". > > Maybe we're having an English language question. > > If something isn't enabled, doesn't that imply that it's disabled? Last > I checked, enabled/disabled were binary operations. It would so appear...but there is this alternative: The firewall is already on. If there is not an explicit disable, it is still on. firewall_enable="NO" wouldnt be a "disable" just a "do nothing. if on, leave on, if off, leave off." It IS confusing though. Especially when man rc.conf says: firewall_enable (bool) Set to ``NO'' if you do not want have firewall rules loaded at startup, or ``YES'' if you do. that sort of implies that it would disable it...but only an implication. I guess that it leaves to the obvious that if it is enabled through a method other then the rc.conf, it is up to the user..er..admin...to know that. anyway. i probably should have read how this all started...:p ...david --- david raistrick (no longer deep in the south georgia woods) drais@atlasta.net http://www.expita.com/nomime.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0201281211070.22070-100000>