I didn't say "traditional", I said "true". While you may prefer to stick with traditional definitions, I prefer to stick with what is now accurate. There is a whole lot of oversimplification on the part of some here, and that's dangerous in the security arena. "Spam" once referred merely to gelatinous pork product; does that mean its current usage is invalid? No. You're being pedantic.
Laura ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul D. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Laura A. Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Bill Royds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 7:07 AM Subject: Re: Basic DMZ Setup Questions... > On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Laura A. Robinson wrote: > > > A "true" DMZ may have a firewall between the Internet and the DMZ, as well > > as between the DMZ and the intranet. > > Not in the traditional definition of the term "DMZ"- Bill's exactly > accurate about its placement. Traditionally Internet-accessible networks > behind firewalls but not in the inside were termed "Service Networks," not > "DMZs"- DMZ tradtitionally meant "network the external interface of the > firewall and internal interface of the border router share." > > Personally, I prefer to stick with the traditional definitions, as it > makes it simple when discussing architectures to infer the ammount of > protection and administration in place. > > Paul > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions > [EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact." > > _______________________________________________ Firewalls mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
