Re: iptables (mod 2/88)
by Anonymous Coward on Wed Mar 26 03:26:00 2003 (GMT)
Let's just say you'll never hear "well, I'd love to use *BSD, but I just can't live without IPTables!"
IPF and PF make more sense to myself personally. Some people prefer the more command-oriented (as opposed to file-oriented) rule style of IPFW and IPTables. In IPF/PF, you just edit a file with your rules, and can change the state of the firewall with a control utility. With IPTables and IPFW, you add/change/delete rules with the same utility, often through a shell script or some such. I'd go for IPFW over IPTables, since
- it runs under FreeBSD
- its syntax isn't a horrible mess of command-line arguments.
I haven't run into anything that I can do with Linux/IPTables that I can't do with the alternatives.
[ Show thread ] [ Reply to this comment ] [ Mod Up ] [ Mod Down ]
Re: iptables (-2/88) by Anonymous Coward on Wed Mar 26 21:36:00 2003 (GMT)
Add Story |
Copyright © 2004-2008
All rights reserved.
Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors,
submission implies license to publish on this web site.
Contents of the archive prior to April 2nd 2004 as well as images
and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original
Jim's kind permission.
Some icons from slashdot.org
used with permission from Kathleen.
This journal runs as CGI with
on OpenBSD, the
source code is
Search engine is ht://Dig.
undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]