RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-22 Thread Murray Taylor
If you run your own DHCP server then you can lock IP numbers via their
MAC id there for the machines you trust.

Then allow them appropriate access via ipf and corral the rest.

(In DCHP create a 'pool' for others that uses a different section of
your ip range)

HTH
mjt

On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 23:51, Paul Hillen wrote:
> Want to thank you guys for your help; I setup my first firewall last night.
> Granted it is basic, and have a lot of work to do yet, but it's a start. It
> is routing and letting my test machines access the web.
> 
> Hopefully the last question (yeah right)
> 
> I decided to use IPFILTER and appears to be easy enough - just have to get
> use to the syntax. Does anyone know if IPFILTER can pass/block based on MAC
> ADDRESS instead of just IP address. I can not find anything on Goggle unless
> I am simply doing an incorrect query.
> 
> Thanks again
> Paul
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 
> 
> This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.
> 
-- 
Murray Taylor
Special Projects Engineer
-
Bytecraft Systems & Entertainment
P: +61 3 8710 2555
F: +61 3 8710 2599
D: +61 3 9238 4275
M: +61 417 319 256
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit us on the web
http://www.bytecraftsystems.com
http://www.bytecraftentertainment.com



---
The information transmitted in this e-mail is for the exclusive
use of the intended addressee and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission,
dissemination or other use of it, or the taking of any action
in reliance upon this information by persons and/or entities
other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
received this in error, please inform the sender and/or
addressee immediately and delete the material. 

E-mails may not be secure, may contain computer viruses and
may be corrupted in transmission. Please carefully check this
e-mail (and any attachment) accordingly. No warranties are
given and no liability is accepted for any loss or damage
caused by such matters.
---


This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-22 Thread Paul Hillen
Want to thank you guys for your help; I setup my first firewall last night.
Granted it is basic, and have a lot of work to do yet, but it's a start. It
is routing and letting my test machines access the web.

Hopefully the last question (yeah right)

I decided to use IPFILTER and appears to be easy enough - just have to get
use to the syntax. Does anyone know if IPFILTER can pass/block based on MAC
ADDRESS instead of just IP address. I can not find anything on Goggle unless
I am simply doing an incorrect query.

Thanks again
Paul

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Steve Bertrand

> I would have to guess if a hardware firewall like Watchguard that offers
VPN
> also, that it would have to be beefer than that. Steve going back to
your
> initial response about the PIII 800MHz network, are you using a proxy
for
> the internal users or are they connecting directly to the firewall as their
> only means of getting out?

[At the main site]
(Selected) users go to a content filter (squid+dansguardian) and it goes
out to the net (through the fw). The content filter has a private IP, and
in itself, it is protected with it's own localized ipfw rules for
protection.

The rest of the clients go directly through the pipe unrestricted through
the firewall to the net. (I know I shouldn't do this with our own proxy,
but that's how it is for now).

> It seems most hardware firewalls do not include
> a
> proxy server, just NAT/VPN, which in this case the proxy would be on a
separate internal machine anyway.

Depends. I once used a Nortel dial-up NAT router box that had it's own
built in web cache. Very small cache mind you, but it worked ok,
especially on a 26.4Kb link.

>
> Comment about the ISA Server setup, which I actually like and not sure
if
> I
> can pull off the same type of setup with FreeBSD. The setup is like
this:
>

Yes, you can. Either with 2 BSD boxes replacing the ISA boxen, or with one
BSD box configured with 3 NIC's -- 1 for Internet connection, 1 for
Internal LAN, and the other from the DMZ. The DMZ NIC can have all sorts
of good rules applied to it, and the internal net can be absolutely cut
off for inbound traffic except for the VPN's.

> External ISA Server (not actual ips)  ISP / 10.10.10.6
>   |
>   |-> Postfix Relay Server10.10.10.5
>   |-> TinyDNS for internet publishing 10.10.10.4
>   |-> TinyDNS for internet publishing 10.10.10.3
>   |-> Webserver   10.10.10.2
>   |
>   |-> Internal ISA Server 10.10.10.1 /
> 10.0.0.1
>   |
>   |-> Exchange Server 10.0.0.2
>   |-> TinyDNS internal publishing 10.0.0.3
>   |-> TinyDNS internal publishing 10.0.0.4
>   |-> Rest of internal servers and network etc...
>
>
> External sites are actually creating a VPN tunnel with a VPN tunnel and
it
> works good, but the ISA Server gets to flaky after about a month of use.
I
> have rebuilt them more than ever thought I would.
>
> At this point I will be happy to just get the firewall and VPN to work, but
> I like the additional layer someone would have to break through in the
above
> scenario.

Like I said above, 2 boxes, or one box with 3 NIC's.

Steve

>
>> Yes, but take into consideration disk reads/writes. It is possible to
eliminate these tasks, and I have even done setups where everything was
flashed onto a CF card (ro) (obviously w/o logging capabilities). I did
a
>> custom build, frequently referring to:
>> http://neon1.net/misc/minibsd.html and put the system on an IDE->CF
card
>> converter.
>
>> Steve
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>




___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Paul Hillen
From: Steve Bertrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

>>> I have around 100 users at our site that would require the use of squid,

>>> we house are own webserver, mail server, public DNS servers in the DMZ 
>>> and 2 private DNS servers on the internal network, used by both Internal

>>> and VPN users.
>>>
>>> Sites connecting Gateway to Gateway, there are apprx as follows;
>>> Site 1 - 25 users
>>> Site 2 - 5 users
>>> Site 3 - 12 users
>>> Our site VPN users are Apprx 25, and about 50% of them are connected at
>>> any given time.
>>>
>>> My first thought is to put up a Firewall box that can the load of
>>> publishing many internal boxes and "publish" a box with OpenVPN and 
>>> another for SQUID and just keep them all separate.
>>>
>>> Will this setup put to much strain on the FIREWALL box or will it have
>>> no problem handling the NAT/ROUTING in this configuration.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>> Paul
>>>
>>
>> Considering that many of the current hardware firewall solutions aren't
>> much more than either a BSD or Linux kernel in a ROM chip, with a 486 or 
>> 586 based cpu, memory, and a nice gui (Windows or Internal Web nterface),

>> I can't see why a similar system on a PC would be any different.

I would have to guess if a hardware firewall like Watchguard that offers VPN
also, that it would have to be beefer than that. Steve going back to your
initial response about the PIII 800MHz network, are you using a proxy for
the internal users or are they connecting directly to the firewall as their
only means of getting out? It seems most hardware firewalls do not include a
proxy server, just NAT/VPN, which in this case the proxy would be on a
separate internal machine anyway.

Comment about the ISA Server setup, which I actually like and not sure if I
can pull off the same type of setup with FreeBSD. The setup is like this:

External ISA Server (not actual ips)ISP / 10.10.10.6
|
|-> Postfix Relay Server10.10.10.5
|-> TinyDNS for internet publishing 10.10.10.4
|-> TinyDNS for internet publishing 10.10.10.3
|-> Webserver   10.10.10.2
|
|-> Internal ISA Server 10.10.10.1 /
10.0.0.1
|
|-> Exchange Server 10.0.0.2
|-> TinyDNS internal publishing 10.0.0.3
|-> TinyDNS internal publishing 10.0.0.4
|-> Rest of internal servers and network etc...


External sites are actually creating a VPN tunnel with a VPN tunnel and it
works good, but the ISA Server gets to flaky after about a month of use. I
have rebuilt them more than ever thought I would.

At this point I will be happy to just get the firewall and VPN to work, but
I like the additional layer someone would have to break through in the above
scenario.

> Yes, but take into consideration disk reads/writes. It is possible to
> eliminate these tasks, and I have even done setups where everything was
> flashed onto a CF card (ro) (obviously w/o logging capabilities). I did a
> custom build, frequently referring to:
>
> http://neon1.net/misc/minibsd.html and put the system on an IDE->CF card 
> converter.

> Steve
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Steve Bertrand
>> I have around 100 users at our site that would require the use of squid,
> we
>> house are own webserver, mail server, public DNS servers in the DMZ and
>> 2
>> private DNS servers on the internal network, used by both Internal and
>> VPN
>> users.
>>
>> Sites connecting Gateway to Gateway, there are apprx as follows;
>> Site 1 - 25 users
>> Site 2 - 5 users
>> Site 3 - 12 users
>> Our site VPN users are Apprx 25, and about 50% of them are connected at
> any
>> given time.
>>
>> My first thought is to put up a Firewall box that can the load of
> publishing
>> many internal boxes and "publish" a box with OpenVPN and another for
>> SQUID
>> and just keep them all separate.
>>
>> Will this setup put to much strain on the FIREWALL box or will it have
>> no
>> problem handling the NAT/ROUTING in this configuration.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>> Paul
>>
>
> Considering that many of the current hardware firewall solutions aren't
> much
> more than either a BSD or Linux kernel in a ROM chip, with a 486 or 586
> based cpu, memory, and a nice gui (Windows or Internal Web interface), I
> can't see why a similar system on a PC would be any different.
>

Yes, but take into consideration disk reads/writes. It is possible to
eliminate these tasks, and I have even done setups where everything was
flashed onto a CF card (ro) (obviously w/o logging capabilities). I did a
custom build, frequently referring to:

http://neon1.net/misc/minibsd.html

and put the system on an IDE->CF card converter.

Steve
> --
>
> Micheal Patterson
> TSG Network Administration
> 405-917-0600
>
> Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments,
> is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Steve Bertrand
>> We have about 6000 users, and the FBSD firewall never ever hiccup'ed. I
>> could even run tcpdump for hours, and it would rarely ever drop even a
>> single packet.
>
> What size hardware is your firewall running on to handle the potential of
> 6000 users accessing your internal servers for mail, etc... The best I can
> come up with is a P4 1.8Ghz with 768MB memory, other than that I have
> PII's
> with around 384MB memory. I would have to assume the Squid server would be
> the best place for the P4?

This one is a P4 2.0 Ghz with 1024M memory. I'd try the P3 as the firewall
and the P4 as the squid server initially (all things considered so far).

>> Sounds like a good setup you are planning. I would set it up, implement
>> it
>> (with the old setup on standby), and if you find performance problems,
>> pull the drive out of the P3 and do as you say, go on a 'spending
>> spree',
>> and put the drive directly into a p4 with a gig of memory, and drop it
>> back in place.
>
> Okay, the tough question, due you know of any good resources that I can
> use
> to put this together. Any pitfalls that I might want to think about in
> this
> design?

Well, searching "ipfw+natd+howto" in google is a great place to start. I
did not use one single definitive guide, I used a variety of sources, man
pages, sample rules, and finally conjured up what works for us.

In planning rules, I placed each openvpn connections rules in it's own
ruleset, as to allow a reload of each connections rules individually if
they needed to be changed.

I also would set up a 'fwd' rule, to forward all packets destined to ``any
80'' from the Internal net to be passed directly to the squid box, as then
you would have a transparent proxy. This will prevent you from having to
change browser settings.

>> Please note that natd is NOT running on the ISP firewall, but on the
>> other
>> such setup it is, and I"ve never seen any performance problems at all.
>
> I am assuming that I will have to use NATD on the firewall in this
> scenario,
> am I thinking right here?

It appears so, yes. natd(8) is quite flexible, and will allow you to many
things, including port forward etc. By the sounds of it, you are planning
on ridding yourself of a DMZ, which means your mail(etc) servers will be
behind the NAT router. natd will take care of this, however, another
option is to put in a third NIC into the box, connect it to a switch, plug
in the servers into the switch. Give each server it's own IP, and route
packets as nessicary to the servers.

Effectively, this will still allow you to keep your DMZ, but eliminating
one entire firewall server, and thus, one license of MS ISA server (and
the headaches that comes with it :o)

Sounds like you'll want to do some testing in a lab first. Hopefully all
your P3's you have available are still loaded with Windows so you can test
effectively and ensure everything works properly.

Steve

>
> Thanks again
> Paul
>
>


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Micheal Patterson


- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Hillen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Steve Bertrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Paul Hillen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:33 PM
Subject: RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question


> I have around 100 users at our site that would require the use of squid,
we
> house are own webserver, mail server, public DNS servers in the DMZ and 2
> private DNS servers on the internal network, used by both Internal and VPN
> users.
>
> Sites connecting Gateway to Gateway, there are apprx as follows;
> Site 1 - 25 users
> Site 2 - 5 users
> Site 3 - 12 users
> Our site VPN users are Apprx 25, and about 50% of them are connected at
any
> given time.
>
> My first thought is to put up a Firewall box that can the load of
publishing
> many internal boxes and "publish" a box with OpenVPN and another for SQUID
> and just keep them all separate.
>
> Will this setup put to much strain on the FIREWALL box or will it have no
> problem handling the NAT/ROUTING in this configuration.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Paul
>

Considering that many of the current hardware firewall solutions aren't much
more than either a BSD or Linux kernel in a ROM chip, with a 486 or 586
based cpu, memory, and a nice gui (Windows or Internal Web interface), I
can't see why a similar system on a PC would be any different.

--

Micheal Patterson
TSG Network Administration
405-917-0600

Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Steve Bertrand
> I have around 100 users at our site that would require the use of squid,
> we
> house are own webserver, mail server, public DNS servers in the DMZ and 2
> private DNS servers on the internal network, used by both Internal and VPN
> users.
>
> Sites connecting Gateway to Gateway, there are apprx as follows;
> Site 1 - 25 users
> Site 2 - 5 users
> Site 3 - 12 users
> Our site VPN users are Apprx 25, and about 50% of them are connected at
> any
> given time.
>
> My first thought is to put up a Firewall box that can the load of
> publishing
> many internal boxes and "publish" a box with OpenVPN and another for SQUID
> and just keep them all separate.
>
> Will this setup put to much strain on the FIREWALL box or will it have no
> problem handling the NAT/ROUTING in this configuration.

I'll go as far as to say that it should have no problem. At the ISP I am
currently working full time for, we recently deployed an ipfw bridge
configured firewall (internally) to protect our core servers from improper
access. There's 8 servers in all (mail, web, mysql, ftp, radius, ssh and
dns).

We have about 6000 users, and the FBSD firewall never ever hiccup'ed. I
could even run tcpdump for hours, and it would rarely ever drop even a
single packet.

Sounds like a good setup you are planning. I would set it up, implement it
(with the old setup on standby), and if you find performance problems,
pull the drive out of the P3 and do as you say, go on a 'spending spree',
and put the drive directly into a p4 with a gig of memory, and drop it
back in place.

Please note that natd is NOT running on the ISP firewall, but on the other
such setup it is, and I"ve never seen any performance problems at all.

Steve

>>
>> ___
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
>> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>>
>
>


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


RE: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Paul Hillen
I have around 100 users at our site that would require the use of squid, we
house are own webserver, mail server, public DNS servers in the DMZ and 2
private DNS servers on the internal network, used by both Internal and VPN
users.

Sites connecting Gateway to Gateway, there are apprx as follows;
Site 1 - 25 users
Site 2 - 5 users
Site 3 - 12 users
Our site VPN users are Apprx 25, and about 50% of them are connected at any
given time.

My first thought is to put up a Firewall box that can the load of publishing
many internal boxes and "publish" a box with OpenVPN and another for SQUID
and just keep them all separate.

Will this setup put to much strain on the FIREWALL box or will it have no
problem handling the NAT/ROUTING in this configuration.

Thanks in advance
Paul



-Original Message-
From: Steve Bertrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 2:10 PM
To: Paul Hillen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

> There are 3 remote sites connecting to our network using GATEWAY to
> GATEWAY
> VPN and around 25 remote VPN users that must be dealt with also. Last
> item,
> there is a chance that I will have to connect 3 more remote sites into the
> picture within the next 6 months, so this needs to be scalable to handle
> the
> load..
>
> My question is, what is the best way to set this up. Here are my thoughts,
> but not sure what is the best way.
>
> * Setup one FreeBSD box that contains FIREWALL, SQUID and OPENVPN or
> * Setup 3 separate boxes to break up the work load.
>

What will the load requirements be? (How many users will require the use
of squid).

I have a FBSD PIII 800 w/256M RAM as a firewall for one of our clients,
with 3 OpenVPN instances running simultaneously (Two are site->site, and
one is an XP-client->site). The box is also performing NAT (ipfw/natd) for
the internal users, which when all are accounted for equal ~120, and I
find it works great. There are about 30 users through the VPN's, though
usually never on all at the same time.

Depending on caching requirements though, you might be better off
splitting that off onto it's own box, especially if you have the hardware
readily available as you suggest.

YMMV.

Steve

>
>
> Many thanks in advance for being patient with what I am sure is stupid
> beginner questions to most of you.
>
>
>
> When giving your choice of which setup, please point me in the direction
> of
> the best resource to put it all together and the hardware requirement you
> would recommend. I have a truck load of PII 300 - 450's due to upgrades,
> so
> if I can use them great, if not, time to go on a spending spree.
>
>
>
> Thanks again
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Steve Bertrand
> There are 3 remote sites connecting to our network using GATEWAY to
> GATEWAY
> VPN and around 25 remote VPN users that must be dealt with also. Last
> item,
> there is a chance that I will have to connect 3 more remote sites into the
> picture within the next 6 months, so this needs to be scalable to handle
> the
> load..
>
> My question is, what is the best way to set this up. Here are my thoughts,
> but not sure what is the best way.
>
> * Setup one FreeBSD box that contains FIREWALL, SQUID and OPENVPN or
> * Setup 3 separate boxes to break up the work load.
>

What will the load requirements be? (How many users will require the use
of squid).

I have a FBSD PIII 800 w/256M RAM as a firewall for one of our clients,
with 3 OpenVPN instances running simultaneously (Two are site->site, and
one is an XP-client->site). The box is also performing NAT (ipfw/natd) for
the internal users, which when all are accounted for equal ~120, and I
find it works great. There are about 30 users through the VPN's, though
usually never on all at the same time.

Depending on caching requirements though, you might be better off
splitting that off onto it's own box, especially if you have the hardware
readily available as you suggest.

YMMV.

Steve

>
>
> Many thanks in advance for being patient with what I am sure is stupid
> beginner questions to most of you.
>
>
>
> When giving your choice of which setup, please point me in the direction
> of
> the best resource to put it all together and the hardware requirement you
> would recommend. I have a truck load of PII 300 - 450's due to upgrades,
> so
> if I can use them great, if not, time to go on a spending spree.
>
>
>
> Thanks again
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Firewall, OpenVPN and Squid question

2004-07-21 Thread Paul Hillen
Hi everyone,

 

I am relatively new to the Unix world, have setup a couple TINYDNS server
and a postfix relay server, so that is the extent of my FreeBSD knowledge.

 

I have 2 Microsoft ISA servers in a BACK to BACK configuration providing a
DMZ in-between that I would like to get rid of, way more trouble than what
they are worth. They work well for about a month and then the performance
goes south.

 

There are 3 remote sites connecting to our network using GATEWAY to GATEWAY
VPN and around 25 remote VPN users that must be dealt with also. Last item,
there is a chance that I will have to connect 3 more remote sites into the
picture within the next 6 months, so this needs to be scalable to handle the
load..

 

My question is, what is the best way to set this up. Here are my thoughts,
but not sure what is the best way.

*   Setup one FreeBSD box that contains FIREWALL, SQUID and OPENVPN or
*   Setup 3 separate boxes to break up the work load.

 

Many thanks in advance for being patient with what I am sure is stupid
beginner questions to most of you.

 

When giving your choice of which setup, please point me in the direction of
the best resource to put it all together and the hardware requirement you
would recommend. I have a truck load of PII 300 - 450's due to upgrades, so
if I can use them great, if not, time to go on a spending spree.

 

Thanks again

Paul

 

 

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"