On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> > (Steps in holding up a REALLY LARGE Stop Sign)
>
> Where were you when a took that wrong turn in Alberqueque?!? :>
>
Ah Albuquerque, may I never see it again :-)
> OK, my perspective on some of the above:
>
> I want something more than some h
Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> ...
> Pretty much all networking related configuration could be directly generated
> from an appropriate functional description of the black box, including
> interface setup, proxy-arp, static-NAT, QOS, and anything else that happens
> inside the box (I don't want
> (Steps in holding up a REALLY LARGE Stop Sign)
Where were you when a took that wrong turn in Alberqueque?!? :>
> Not picking on you Mike, but you're the first to step out into the open on
> this issue, and the first to do more than hint about the possibility.
>
> Are we looking at a rewrite of
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Mike Sensney wrote:
> Here is my attempt at restating the problem.
(Steps in holding up a REALLY LARGE Stop Sign)
Not picking on you Mike, but you're the first to step out into the open on
this issue, and the first to do more than hint about the possibility.
Are we looking
Sounds like CheckPoint's GUI, or even more like Cisco's Network
Configurator (not sure of the name, no one really uses it).
I have to admit I'm pretty ambivalent about changing focus. Firewall
configuration focusses on the router because it is a router. Call it a
packet filter or a firewall or a
Here is my attempt at restating the problem.
Charles mentions the various tools in current use, like Seawall and
the extended scripts and what is wrong with them. (Not easily
extended and/or modified beyond their original limited purpose.)
Where I see the problem is that current routing/firewa
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> > > For instance, the following network:
> >
> > ...is a nightmarish FrankenNetwork. Hence EigerStein perhaps? I applaud
> > you for making it work well. =)
>
> Who said it worked well? :>
Works well enough that they're keeping it, neh? =)
> I
> > For instance, the following network:
>
> ...is a nightmarish FrankenNetwork. Hence EigerStein perhaps? I applaud
> you for making it work well. =)
Who said it worked well? :>
> > The complexity level of configuration grows dramatically as the scripts
are
> > 'generalized' to try and do more
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> Current solutions:
> Various scripts like sea-wall, Matthew Grant's scripts, and many 'click the
> box & build a script' type programs. These solutions can be very easy to
> use, and configurable (to an extent), but they quickly run into problems
Since no-one seems to be quite catching on to what I mean when about a new
way to do firewalls, this is an attempt to explain myself. I apologize in
advance for re-hashing any concepts already understood.
Current solutions:
Various scripts like sea-wall, Matthew Grant's scripts, and many 'click
10 matches
Mail list logo
