of the initiator which
> in normal circumstances is not likely. Any comments?
>
> /Kana
> - Original Message -
> From: David Ball
> To: Kanagaraj Krishna
> Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 3:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [j-ns
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kanagaraj Krishna) [Thu 28 Jun 2007, 13:22 CEST]:
> Aren't the incoming filters used to filter access to certain
> services/port into the router? I'm curious on how an external response
> (from a telnet request) could be affected unless it tries to respond to
> port 80 of th
y comments?
/Kana
- Original Message -
From: David Ball
To: Kanagaraj Krishna
Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 55, Issue 33
It very likely IS allowing OUTgoing telnet, even without the
@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 55, Issue 33
It very likely IS allowing OUTgoing telnet, even without the
adjustment in your filter. The problem is, it's not allowing the
response from the (assumed) web server in the INbound direction, hence
your need fo
ay, June 27, 2007 12:51 PM
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 55, Issue 33
Hi,
I've applied an input filter (hardening) to protect the routing
engine of an m7i by applying it on the loopback IP. Refer to the config
below. The issue is that, we can't
It very likely IS allowing OUTgoing telnet, even without the
adjustment in your filter. The problem is, it's not allowing the
response from the (assumed) web server in the INbound direction, hence
your need for the allowance in your input filter.
David
On 6/27/07, Kanagaraj Krishna <[EMAIL P
Hi,
I've applied an input filter (hardening) to protect the routing engine of
an m7i by applying it on the loopback IP. Refer to the config below. The issue
is that, we can't telnet port:80 to any external IP from the box itself.
Obviously I've not allowed access to port 80 on my box in the i
7 matches
Mail list logo
