Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 4 Oct 2003 19:39:21 +0200
From:      "Roderick van Domburg" <r.s.a.vandomburg@student.utwente.nl>
To:        "Marcin Gryszkalis" <mg@fork.pl>
Cc:        freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: When to use setup keyword?
Message-ID:  <007d01c38a9e$73883cc0$6ba55982@gog>
References:  <006b01c38a90$dea3b420$6ba55982@gog> <3F7EFDFA.4060703@fork.pl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > All services run just fine, but I was thinking that excluding 'setup'
here
> > and there would make for a cleaner solution? For example, I don't think
that
> > HTTP (even 1.1) requires the setup keyword does it?
>
> Please refer to ipfw manual *and* some TCP/IP reference.
> ipfw is TCP/IP level firewall, while HTTP is application level
> protocol (higher). ipfw knows nothing about HTTP.

I know, but HTTP/1.1 does allow for ``threaded sessions'', so to speak. What
I don't know without glancing at any RFC's is whether HTTP/1.1 clients open
multiple sockets on port 80 or several sockets in the dynamic range.

Hence my question: which services require the setup keyword and which don't?

Regards,

Roderick



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?007d01c38a9e$73883cc0$6ba55982>