similar to: My 2.0 Configuration

The current CVS version (/Shorewall project) contains a redesigned IP accounting facility. The new facility is: a) Much simpler. :-) b) More flexible. :-) c) Compatible with bw-acct. :-) c) Incompatible with the previous implementation :-( There''s a new Accounting Page available at: http://shorewall.net/AccountingNew.html On top of Snapshot 20030813: a) Move the

The current Shorewall release model has the following characteristics: a) The last two major releases are supported. b) Only the latest major release is actively developed. c) Bug fixes are available for the prior major release but only against the last minor release. d) The last major release is advertised as the "Current Release". I''m thinking of switching to a model that

The generic tunnel support that I posted about yesterday has been updated: a) A bug that caused [re]start errors has been corrected. b) A list of zones may now be included in the third column of /etc/shorewall/tunnels; the semantics are the same as for ipsec tunnels. In addition, the ADDRESS column in /etc/shorewall/masq may now contain a comma-separated list of IP ranges/addresses. This enables

Rather than have lots of folks downloading a version with a broken ''check'' command, I''ve released 1.4.1a that corrects the problem. Sorry for the back-to-back releases today... -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.sf.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net

Hi folks, I''ve added a couple of ''help wanted'' ads to our SourceForge project. You can see them at http://sourceforge.net/people/?group_id=22587 I''ll add more as i have the opportunity. If you can think of other jobs we need to assign, please let me know. -- Paul <http://paulgear.webhop.net> -- Did you know? Using accepted quoting conventions makes

Greetings, What programming languages besides shell scripting are used in shorewall? What knowledge is needed to help in shorewall development? I figure iptables is a goood bet but is there anything else as well? Thank you for your time. Regards, Jason

Although Shorewall provides safeguards against it, people seem to regularly shoot themselves in the foot when doing remote system administration. I''ve been thinking about this problem and wonder if a change to the way that "shorewall stop" behaves might help. Today, "shorewall stop" stops all traffic except to/from those destinations listed in

Ron and Steve, I am ready to begin the documentation changes for 1.3.2. Are you close to having any of your changes ready for release? If so, we can get those into CVS before I begin my changes -- if not, then I''ll go ahead and update CVS with the 1.3.2 material. Please let me know. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy AIM: tmeastep \ http://www.shorewall.net

Hi, I read the news about Tom Steps quit. I use shorewall for some days now and as many people I ike it very much. I asked Tom in a personal mail, what could be done to continue the project and he told me I had to subscribe to this list. My ideas where: a) Mirroring the site b) I would like to study the code and help c) I am studying computer science and I could ask some teachers and friends

Hi! Taking into consideration the great speed with which the use of P2P filesharing systems is expanding, is there any plan of including ipp2p and ipt_CONNTRACK support into shorewall? I''m sure that many admins managing gateways would be very happy about it... Thanx, -- Mario R. Pizzolanti <mario@zavood.ee> Zavood O?

I think we should add an FAQ entry for tcp_ecn. I remember Tom giving a good description in one of his many responses and there is mention of it in the pptp page, but I could not find the response from Tom about different tcp stacks. Thanks, -- Steve Herber herber@thing.com work: 206-261-0307 Systems Engineer, AMCIS, UoW home: 425-454-2399 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat,

FYI... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: RE: [Shorewall-users] 2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall Date: Thursday 23 September 2004 07:44 From: "Jonathan Schneider" <jon@clearconcepts.ca> To: "''Tom Eastep''" <teastep@shorewall.net> I must have been up too late working on this, looking at it the next day I noticed I completely forgot

FYI This bug will prevent ''shorewall restore'' from working if you have "!<single IP address>" in the ORIGINAL DEST column. -Tom ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: [PATCH] Another iptables-save buglet Date: Wednesday 14 September 2005 15:09 From: Tom Eastep <teastep@shorewall.net> To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org The conntrack

Hello Everyone, This morning I received a personal email from a recent poster asking "Why is Mr. Eastep so mean?". The post went on to explain that I had responded abruptly to the person''s request for help and asked why I wasn''t more helpful to people attempting to understand something new. Good question. Over the last nine months, I have been struggling to deal with

Hi I have 2nic firewall . I had to open some ranges of udp and tcp ports . I faced a problem that although all the ports are open Some functionality was not working . Any body used shorewall with H323 Voip traffic DNATed . Any help is appretiated . Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: <shorewall-users-request@lists.shorewall.net> To: <shorewall-users@lists.shorewall.net> Sent:

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 Problems Corrected: 1. The "shorewall check" command results in the (harmless) error message: /usr/share/shorewall/firewall: line 2753: check_dupliate_zones: command not found 2. The

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 Problems Corrected: 1. The "shorewall check" command results in the (harmless) error message: /usr/share/shorewall/firewall: line 2753: check_dupliate_zones: command not found 2. The

As 2.2.0 is nearing release, I''ve begun to think about what I''ll do for 2.3 and I think that it is time for Shorewall to add support for IPV6. Because of parsing ambiguities, the need to maintain upward compatibility with both Shorewall and 6Wall, and different available functionality in IPV4 and IPV6 Netfilter, I believe that it is going to be necessary for some files to be

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 As I pointed out to Wilson in a private message, this appears to show that no other connection requests (other than port 3000) are being sent from the client to the server (or at least no other connection requests are being received by the Shorewall box). Wilson: Are you sure that the client is supposed to open port 3001 on the server and not the

Subject says it all... -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://www.shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net