Re: IPFW and PF

2006-10-31 Thread Andrew Pantyukhin
On 10/30/06, Andy Greenwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10/30/06, Lowell Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Andy Greenwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> top-posted: > > > On 10/28/06, David Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> IPFW seems to be the same IPFW that is used on MacOSX,

Re: IPFW and PF

2006-10-30 Thread Andy Greenwood
On 10/30/06, Lowell Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Andy Greenwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> top-posted: > On 10/28/06, David Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> IPFW seems to be the same IPFW that is used on MacOSX, so it seems to >> make sense to learn and lean on IPFW when using

Re: IPFW and PF

2006-10-30 Thread Lowell Gilbert
"Andy Greenwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> top-posted: > On 10/28/06, David Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> IPFW seems to be the same IPFW that is used on MacOSX, so it seems to >> make sense to learn and lean on IPFW when using in a mixed Machine >> Environment. On the other side, ma

Re: IPFW and PF

2006-10-30 Thread Andy Greenwood
PF, for two reasons. Firstly, because I don't have to mess with arbitrary rule numbers; I can just scroll down the page and know that rules will be executed in that order. Secondly becuase I can easily integrate bruteforceblocker. On 10/28/06, David Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi all, IPF