Bug 48366

Summary: Update to Dialup firewalling with FreeBSD...
Product: Documentation Reporter: Sean Chittenden <seanc>
Component: Books & ArticlesAssignee: freebsd-doc (Nobody) <doc>
Status: Closed FIXED    
Severity: Affects Only Me CC: marcs
Priority: Normal    
Version: Latest   
Hardware: Any   
OS: Any   
Attachments:
Description Flags
file.diff none

Description Sean Chittenden freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2003-02-17 10:50:14 UTC 
This is a pretty simple update that makes the firewall rules used for
dialup machines significantly more secure and much smaller.  If there
are no objections, I'd like to commit this in a week.

FWIW, I had it pointed out to me that there is a decided lack of examples
for ipfw(8) so I'm idly updating various articles/books bits that I've
seen that need updating.  Is there anyone else doing similar bits?

Fix: http://people.freebsd.org/~seanc/#dialup_firewall_rules_update
Comment 1 Ceri Davies freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2003-02-17 11:09:03 UTC 
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:47:47AM -0800, Sean Chittenden wrote:

> This is a pretty simple update that makes the firewall rules used for
> dialup machines significantly more secure and much smaller.  If there
> are no objections, I'd like to commit this in a week.

Sean,

This looks good, but please commit the whitespace changes separately
(the EOL change and the s/ruleset/rule set/ ones).

Thanks,

Ceri
Comment 2 Sean Chittenden freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2003-02-17 11:35:57 UTC 
State Changed
From-To: open->closed

Committed whitespace separate from the changes, thanks! 

Sorry for the PR spam, my reverse DNS isn't working at the 
moment so nothings getting through to hub.
Comment 3 Tom Hukins freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2003-02-18 06:49:40 UTC 
I have a few comments on what looks like a useful patch:

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:47:47AM -0800, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> +	  <para>Enables the new version of IPFW.</para>
> +	  <important><para>Only do this if you're running FreeBSD 4.X,
> +	  this is the default in newer versions of
> +	  FreeBSD.</para></important>

These a re two separate clauses, so a semicolon or full stop would be
more appropriate after "4.X".

> -    <para>If so, you will need to specifically disable 
> +    <para>If so, you will need to specifically disable

In addition, s/will need/need/.

> -    <title>The ruleset for the firewall</title>
> +    <title>The rule set for the firewall</title>

I notice we use "ruleset" and "rule set" inconsistently through doc
and www - I agree that we should prefer "rule set".

Tom