> I have to say that I have different results for the ping responses, mine > are in line with Steve and contrary to yours. Dunno why.
I could think of a few reasons, but debugging it would be better. If it works for others, then there's at least one condition for which it doesn't (still a bug ;). > Perhaps it > doesn't like your IP addressing scheme, as suggested by Steve. Maybe > somehow it is substituting its own netmasks based on what it thinks are > the right ones, and it just doesn't get CIDR. Who knows! Have you > checked with the command line that the netmasks assigned to the > interfaces are what you sopecified and not what ipcop thinks is right? Yes, all checked out ok. No point starting testing unless ifconfig, route show usable results :) In fact those two showed my that I needed a third attempt to get it right. But it all works with tcp, so it's not an interface or routing table issue. > I have heard endian is good, must look into it. No setting to turn those ping responses off ;), several application-level proxies with what looks like good BUIs, strong on content filtering. No time-dependent blocking functions. Network cards other than the controlling one are assigned with BUI, the controlling one can onlyhave its IP changed. Requires javascript, but it's well used. No addons mechanism, and therefore no extensions. rpm based, kernel 2.6. A bit closer to a Linux distro and further from an embedded Linux, compared with ipcop. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
