On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > It's my favorite packet filter code.
>
> But is it stateful? See my previous message.
It does state on a non-application consistant basis. Since I generally
deploy it between an application layer gateway and a non-stateful filter
that's never been a big thing for me. Generally I've only found it useful
for non-state protocols like DNS anyway, since application layer gateways
keep better state for everything else I've ever allowed.
Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
PSB#9280
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Aaron C. Springer
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering bmurrell
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Aaron C. Springer
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering bmurrell
- RE: Free stateful packet filte... Aaron C. Springer
- RE: Free stateful packet filte... bmurrell
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Ron DuFresne
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Paul D. Robertson
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering bmurrell
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Jeff Burson
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Paul D. Robertson
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Gary Flynn
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Chris Brenton
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Ron DuFresne
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Paul D. Robertson
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Ron DuFresne
- Re: Free stateful packet filtering Ron DuFresne
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Ronneil Camara
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Ronneil Camara
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Ron DuFresne
- RE: Free stateful packet filtering Igor Gashinsky
