From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Oct 20 12:41: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4A514CF9; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ssamalin@ionet.net) Received: from ionet.net (sam.ops.best.com [205.149.163.53]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with ESMTP id MAA21162; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:36:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <380E19B5.71C5BE39@ionet.net> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:36:21 -0400 From: Sam Samalin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-isp , freebsd-ipf , freebsd-security , freebsd-net Subject: ipfw not alias to bind Class C to interface? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Has anyone done this? What are the pros/cons? We want to use ipfw instead of aliases with all our internet servers to bind Class Cs. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message