On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 12:03 -0700, Scott Rotondo wrote: > It would be ideal if the way of expressing service rules made it > impossible to affect other services. I don't think the current syntax > for service rules provides that assurance (and it may not be feasible to > do so), but it would be great if it could.
we could do this if we could somehow associate an filter ruleset with a
process contract -- and associate sockets opened by members of that
contract with that filter ruleset.
- Bill
