Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:26:07 +0300
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
To:        Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com>
Cc:        Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: firewall on FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <20050627002607.GA84977@gothmog.gr>
In-Reply-To: <42BF1B0F.6010402@dial.pipex.com>
References:  <MIEPLLIBMLEEABPDBIEGMEIMHHAA.fbsd_user@a1poweruser.com> <200506241731.13651.martin@orbweavers.co.uk> <08A3A012657D73D10A220154@Paul-Schmehls-Computer.local> <20050625064224.GB4460@masterpost> <1585990126FE46C02925C321@Paul-Schmehls-Computer.local> <42BDEB5E.5030003@dial.pipex.com> <20050626031837.GB3020@gothmog.gr> <42BF1B0F.6010402@dial.pipex.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2005-06-26 22:15, Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >On 2005-06-26 00:40, Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> >>>pf on freebsd does support the "quick" keyword.  The "default"
> >>>firewall, ipfw, does not.
> >>>
> >>This makes no sense to me.  The two firewalls work very differently.
> >>[...]
> >>
> >You describe very nicely the way rules are matched by two of the three
> >different firewalls available on FreeBSD.  The description, being very
> >correct, *does* make sense.
> >
> >Why do you say that ``This makes no sense to you''
>
> Maybe I'm misreading something, or taking it out of context, but the
> statement "ipfw does not support the quick keyword" makes no sense to
> me. [...]  Am *I* making any more sense, now?

Yes, thank you :)




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050627002607.GA84977>