Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 23:24:26 -0500 (EST) From: "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net> To: Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org> Cc: Tom Legg <tjlegg@shore.net>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Minor rc.network bug for 4.0 and ipfw Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003252321020.35458-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> In-Reply-To: <38DD8E7B.CA0781BD@gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Doug Barton wrote: >Tom Legg wrote: > >> In fact the current situation renders the rc.conf flag for >> firewall_enable mute. You might as well eliminate the flag and have >> /etc/rc.network check whether net.inet.ip.fw.enable=1 and go from >> there. > > I think you mean moot. :) In any case, the current set of options >allows a user to specify the settings in rc.conf without compiling the >ipfw stuff into the kernel. > >Doug No, actually mute is appropriate. firewall_enable is not allowed to express itself if ipfw is compiled in. Even when firewall_enable is explicitly set to "NO", as it is in /etc/defaults/rc.conf, it's voice is not heard and net.inet.ip.fw.enable is set true. Not saying anything about the merits of either default setup, just that mute is an appropriate adjective. ------------------------------------------------------------- | -Brandon D. Valentine bandix at looksharp.net | bandix on EFnet IRC BVRiker on AIM ------------------------------------------------------------- | "...and as for hackers, we note that all of those known to | The Register are so strapped financially that seizing their | property would be tantamount to squeezing blood from a | stone." -- The Register, 02/17/2000 ------------------------------------------------------------- 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.4.21.0003252321020.35458-100000>