Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:33:09AM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> Jails are kind of like the translators. They're a kernel-specifc (or
> whatever the Hurd is supposed to be) add-on. They're useful, but more of
> a nice-to-have add-on than an essential feature for an operating system.
> Complete and usable TCP/IP support is not, and I, and many other people,
> would classify firewalling as a required part of a complete TCP/IP
Richard Stevens, TCP/IP Illustrated, Vol. 1 does mention firewall gateways
only three times (and has one book about it in the bibliography for
further reading). I don't have the other two, so maybe someone can check if
he covers firewalling in those books in more detail.
He does not mention firewalling on non-gateway hosts.
I have not a lot experience with administration of network systems, but
what I have seen is that the common way to use firewalls is to buy them as
firewalls and use them to secure the LAN.
> FWIW, Debian GNU/FreeBSD will have firewalling tools. It looks like
> there are two different firewall implementations supported by the
> kernel, actually. There is also IPsec and IPv6 support.
FWIW, Debian GNU/Hurd will have ways to secure the network and services, too.
It might even have firewall features. But does the first version have
firewall features? Maybe. This depends on a lot of things, and all of them
are completely unrelated to how important firewalling really is.
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org email@example.com
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org firstname.lastname@example.org
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org