From owner-freebsd-ipfw Mon Aug 28 16:13:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.rresearch.com (ip104.gte21.rb1.bel.nwlink.com [207.202.191.104]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAA6537B423 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:13:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns1.rresearch.com (localhost.rresearch.com [127.0.0.1]) by ns1.rresearch.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA43037; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:13:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sab@ns1.rresearch.com) Message-Id: <200008282313.QAA43037@ns1.rresearch.com> To: "Daryl Chance" Cc: "FreeBSD IPFW" Subject: Re: ipfw add exec(blah).... References: <005f01c01104$b382a980$0200000a@development1> In-reply-to: <005f01c01104$b382a980$0200000a@development1> From: Scott Blachowicz Reply-To: scott@sabmail.rresearch.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <43034.967504423.1@ns1.rresearch.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:13:44 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Daryl Chance" wrote: > Has there ever been any type of discussion about adding > something to ipfw to execute a certain command if a fw > rule is triggered? Well...ipfw can log to syslog and syslogd can run a command on receipt of messages - check 'man syslog.conf' for details. I'd guess that since the capability is already there in that form, it shouldn't be necessary to stick it in ipfw "itself". -- Scott.Blachowicz@seaslug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message