ipchains is not stateful so it doesnt need contrak...right?
jd

>From: Christian Seberino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Patrick Schaaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: how is this stuff getting thru default deny iptables 
>firewall?....
>Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:08:52 -0700
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [198.186.203.85] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id 
>MHotMailBEF485390058400431CEC6BACB5599E90; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:32:25 -0700
>Received: from va.samba.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])by lists.samba.org 
>(Postfix) with ESMTPid BD14F424A; Tue,  9 Jul 2002 12:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from dt092n42.san.rr.com (dt092n42.san.rr.com [204.210.48.66])by 
>lists.samba.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4534A48for 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue,  9 Jul 2002 12:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from seberino by dt092n42.san.rr.com with local (Exim 3.32 #1)id 
>17S0M0-0006ST-00; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:08:52 -0700
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:33:44 -0700
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
><20020622173842.AGM19225.mta07-svc.ntlworld.com@there> 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 
>Jun 27, 2002 at 09:37:30AM +0200
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8
>Precedence: bulk
>List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help>
>List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>List-Subscribe: 
><http://lists.samba.org/listinfo/netfilter>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe>
>List-Id: netfilter user discussion list <netfilter.lists.samba.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><http://lists.samba.org/listinfo/netfilter>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/netfilter/>
>
> > On the other hand, if there is not yet a conntrack record in existence
> > for the packet, the nat PREROUTING table is consulted
>
>Patrick
>
>I appreciate all your help and after thinking about this on my vacation
>last week I think I got it now thanks to your feedback!
>Can I ask you few questions to verify I got what you said regarding
>how a private LAN can use DNS, HTTP, SMTP, etc. thru an SSH-only 
>firewall?...
>
>My main confusion I believe was that packets associated with preexisting
>conntracks are handled differently than packets *not* associated
>with a previous conntrack.
>
>Q1: The conntrack is the "memory" of netfilter that allows it to make
>decisions based on "history" of PC traffic right?
>
>Q2: Packets with a previous associated conntrack are handled *differently* 
>than ones
>without previous conntrack... and any attempt to try to understand
>behavior of firewall *without* this concept is doomed
>to confusion right?
>
>Q3: Is conntrack a new "iptables only" feature? I imagine ancient 
>ipchains/ipfwadmin
>would have had same issues and therefore would need something like
>"conntrack" to work correctly right?
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Chris
>--
>_______________________________________
>
>Dr. Christian Seberino
>SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego
>Code 2363
>53560 Hull Street
>San Diego, CA 92152-5001
>U.S.A.
>
>Phone: (619) 553-7940
>Fax:   (619) 553-2836
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>_______________________________________
>


thanks,
jd

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.taproot.bz

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


Reply via email to