On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 11:57:53AM -0700, Brent Fulgham wrote: > > > Can anyone comment on why Linux would be unsuitable for firewall use > > > in this configuration? > > > > Can you explain what an `active' packet is? > > > > That's my question as well. I can't find any reference to an "active" > packet definition. Could he mean some kind of "keep-alive" configuration?
My guess (and it's only a guess) is that an 'active' packet (from the AS/400s point of view) is one sent down a connection that the AS/400 initiates, whilst a 'passive' packet is one sent down a connection initiated by the other end. In some primitive firewalling schemes connections can only be initiated in one directions (typically, in the case of a corporate firewall, only outbound connections). Needless to say, there is no 'limitation' of Linux in this respect --- a Linux firewall can be configured to forward and/or rewrite packets in any way desired. Jules -- Jules Bean | Any sufficiently advanced [EMAIL PROTECTED] | technology is indistinguishable [EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
