Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:57:24 +0700 (ICT) From: Olivier Nicole <on@cs.ait.ac.th> To: mikel@ocsinternet.com Cc: JHowie@msn.com, jwyatt@rwsystems.net, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Theory Question Message-ID: <200104100457.LAA10040@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> In-Reply-To: <3AD1C188.F34164C7@ocsinternet.com> (message from Mikel on Mon, 09 Apr 2001 10:04:56 -0400) References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10104072029260.31820-100000@bsdie.rwsystems.net> <05dd01c0c00d$657a8510$0101a8c0@development.local> <3AD1C188.F34164C7@ocsinternet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>I've heard this as well; and seem to remember hearing it while attending some >cisco training or something. I fully agree, that they aren't very good for >security, and truthfully I don't think they're very good for a busy network >either... As a Cisco guru once said in a security seminar (must have been apricot few years back), one and only design of Vlan is contention of broadcast. Anything beyond that is pushing security risk. Olivier To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104100457.LAA10040>