RE: Start up scripts
Henry Hollenberg speed@barney.iamerica.net
Yes, I see your point, I guess I'm the most vocal user at this point on
this site (since I'm paying for the connection! :-)), but this needs to
work well for many if it's to have any value....we need some numbers of
people beating on the architecture to validate it, not just me.
Do you think we could get away with proxying these and maintain a
"non-modultated" kernel? Perhaps have an option in the install script to
branch to "modultated" or "non-modultated" with perhaps a brief note about
what's being given up and gained.
Oh yeah, I expect my site to grow into a heavily used site soon....so I'll
probably need to get with the program as far as the new whiz bang
protocols are concerned.
On Thu, 5 Mar 1998, Meskes, Michael wrote:
> I do not use these all. :-) BTW the second number listed is the use
> count. As you see only ftp is in use now. But some of my users have used
> vdolive and of course irc . Also we wanted to try cuseeme.
>
> Anyway, I don't think restricting ftp to passive is a good idea. While I
> agree that it is for security reasons it certainly is not for user
> friendlyness. There's more to ftp than using a browser to access some
> files. There are quite some programs, libraries and scripts that use
> ftp. And not all are configurable.
>
> I think we shouldn't act as if we were on an island. We will get users
> who ask for these services and I prefer a firewall that has been
> constructed with these in mind.
>
> Michael
>
> > > ip_masq_quake 1 0
> > > ip_masq_ftp 1 2
> > > ip_masq_raudio 1 0
> > > ip_masq_irc 1 0
> > > ip_masq_cuseeme 1 0
> > >
> > > You could get rid of them if you don't waynt to allow the the
> > program to
> > > be used or add a proxy for it.
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-firewall-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? e-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: