?????? #14845 ?????? ???????? SIMS@stalker.com
?? ????: Timothy Binder <lists@cyberthorn.net>
????: Re: Wandering off-topic: Speedstream 5861 (was Re: Authentication Attempts)
????: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:49:37 -0500
????: SIMS Discussions <SIMS@mail.stalker.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619)
On Dec 1, 2004, at 8:36 AM, Warren Michelsen wrote:

I'd like a router/firewall that will protect others servers as well. Since SIMS is on an iMac... Besides, while I might trust IPNR on X to stand between the net and my servers, I wouldn't put an OS 9 box in that position.

No, I prefer a dedicated, no-moving-parts solution.

I want to note for the record that IPNR is very robust. It is really just an interface to the full potential of the underlying Streams code at the lower levels of the OS. I consider robust in both blocking/filtering potential -- possibly much more so than an inexpensive box, although not a stand alone firewall -- and in uptime. Even when the upper level OS crashed on my box, the routing almost always kept working, since it's at a lower level. Frequently, the only way I would know my box was down was when I discovered SIMS was no longer responding.

That being said, I understand the desire for a dedicated box. I actually had one for a brief bit -- I believe it was an SMC box. Then I found it would start reverting the mapping on inbound NAT so that the originating IP address was itself, rather than the real originating IP. Once this happened, it opened up my SIMS box to spammers using 30 second client authentication once I sent a real message. When the problem recurred, I just returned the box and returned to IPNR, as there was no way I was going to waste further time in trying to fix a problem already solved with IPNR.

Hope this helps someone,
A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

??????????? (?????) ??????????? (????????) ??????????? (??????????) ?????????? ???????? Listmaster-?