Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 08:41:22 -0800 (PST) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@hub.freebsd.org> To: luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it Cc: housley@frenchknot.ne.mediaone.net, noor@NetVision.net.il, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw behavior, is it normal? Message-ID: <19990328164122.5460B14D2F@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <199903281348.PAA03730@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> (message from Luigi Rizzo on Sun, 28 Mar 1999 15:48:36 %2B0200 (MET DST)) References: <199903281348.PAA03730@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> > Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 15:48:36 +0200 (MET DST) > Cc: housley@frenchknot.ne.mediaone.net, noor@NetVision.net.il, > freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG > Content-Type: text > Content-Length: 1440 > > "add" does not mean "replace"! the old syntax would still be valid. agreed! ;) > > seems to me that the new syntax would not be used very frequently. > > most of my rules (27 of 30) have "any" as one endpoint. dont think > > that i want to use a "between" in cominbation with "any". > > i guess this is just a matter of preference (or use!). eg you (?) > said to use it certainly is more a matter of preference than substance, i agree unreservedly. when it comes to security issues, i tend to want things to be less automatic and more explicit, so that people have to realize what they are about, rather than having it just work our for them while not understanding what they are leaving open. but my objection is not a firmly held belief. jmb To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990328164122.5460B14D2F>