similar to: Off-list Posts

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "Off-list Posts"

2004 Sep 29
0
Re: Shorewall-users Digest, Vol 22, Issue 65
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:
2005 Mar 14
0
Duplicate Posts
We have someone in Europe (Germany presumably) that is subscribed to this list and that gets their email from pop.kundenserver.de and who is reposting all list posts BACK TO THE LIST through dmb-it.de. I assume that this is a mis-configured news gateway or something similar. The problem began on March 7 but wasn''t visible to the list until this past weekend when I put a hack in my
2005 Mar 05
1
List Closed to Non-member Posts
For several years, this list has been moderated for non-member posts. I''ve found that this is a pain for me (I have to wade through the spam to find and approve legitimate posts). Additionally, non-members seem to almost universally ignore instructions to mention that they are non-members in their post. Since the mailing list is set up so that replies go to the list rather than to the
2004 Sep 23
0
Fwd: RE: 2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall
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
2005 Sep 20
0
Fwd: [PATCH] Another iptables-save buglet
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
2004 Nov 02
0
Shorewall 2.2.0 Beta 2
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
2004 Nov 02
3
Shorewall 2.2.0 Beta 2
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
2007 Nov 28
2
[Fwd: Re: Port 3001 still have problem]
-----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
2005 May 31
0
My Apologies for the large post
I didn''t realize that Eduardo''s post was so large or I wouldn''t have forwarded it to the list. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net PGP Public Key \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key
2004 Dec 30
5
I''m off the list for a couple of days
.... I need a break. Happy New Year, -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net PGP Public Key \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key
2004 Aug 05
0
I''m off the List for a while
I need a break -- I''m going to focus on the 2.1 release for a while and I trust that you folks will look after each other for a week or two. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net
2005 Jan 03
1
RE: Outlook Web Access behind shorewall firewalldoesn''t work
Thanks for such a quick reply Tom! Any suggestions then as to what I might do other than putting a second nic in the SBS and opening it up for web access? I don''t like the idea, but since MS SBS includes fireall that is actually what MS suggests. Boyd -----Original Message----- From: Tom Eastep [mailto:teastep@shorewall.net] Sent: January 3, 2005 3:05 PM To: Shorewall Users Cc: Boyd
2003 Nov 19
0
FW: logwatch
>-----Original Message----- >From: Ama Kalu [mailto:ama.kalu@cwlgroup.net] >Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 9:07 PM >To: ''Tom Eastep'' >Subject: RE: [Shorewall-users] logwatch > >Thanks Tom and Andrew, > >About 2 months ago, I setup the most current (at the time) version of >logwatch, it required a service filter for IPTABLES which I did not have
2002 Dec 27
0
HTML Posts
Some list subscribers post in HTML. In this regard, the Shorewall list seems unique -- most lists that I subscribe to flame HTML posters unmercifully whereas this list is unusually tolerent. While the list server here at shorewall.net accepts and distributes these HTML posts, a growing number of MTAs serving list subscribers are rejecting this HTML list traffic. At least one MTA has gone so
2007 Mar 26
0
Re: Expected handling of [SYN] when expecting[SYN, ACK]?
Hi Tom, Many thanks for that, that''s really helped. Netfilter is indeed dropping the packets as invalid. Thanks and regards, Frances -----Original Message----- From: Tom Eastep [mailto:teastep@shorewall.net] Sent: 23 March 2007 18:05 To: Shorewall Users Subject: Re: [Shorewall-users] Expected handling of [SYN] when expecting[SYN, ACK]? Frances Flood wrote: > Basically, if the
2005 Mar 30
1
RE: Shorewall and an inline IDS(snort-inlineorhogwash)
Plus I would like to let you know that it works like a charm. Snort can now see those packets. -----Original Message----- From: shorewall-users-bounces@lists.shorewall.net [mailto:shorewall-users-bounces@lists.shorewall.net] On Behalf Of Thibodeau, Jamie L. Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:25 AM To: Mailing List for Shorewall Users Subject: RE: [Shorewall-users] Shorewall and an inline
2004 Jun 07
0
Re: Re: Proxy arp users
No, i did it normally. So it seems a router misconfiguration, doesn`t it? if so, tomorrow i will call the customer support. Glad it is not my fault :-) -- Ciao Nico ----- Messaggio originale ----- Da: "Tom Eastep"<teastep@shorewall.net> Inviato: 07/06/04 20.27.28 A: "Mailing List for Shorewall Users"<shorewall-users@lists.shorewall.net> Oggetto: Re:
2006 Oct 13
1
Re: Tc rules Help with multiISP + squid& squidguard...
In policy $FW Net ACCEPT Dump.rar join THX -----Message d''origine----- De : shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] De la part de Tom Eastep Envoyé : jeudi 12 octobre 2006 21:22 À : Shorewall Users Objet : Re: [Shorewall-users] Tc rules Help with multiISP + squid& squidguard... Joffrey FLEURICE wrote: > > >
2006 Oct 20
0
Re: Tcrules Helpwith multiISP+ squid& squidguard...
Yessssssssssssssssssss !! THANKSS it Works !!!! Thanks a lot, if you come to Lille,France I''ll Offer you a big Beer) Joffrey -----Message d''origine----- De : shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] De la part de Tom Eastep Envoyé : jeudi 19 octobre 2006 21:46 À : Shorewall Users Objet : Re: [Shorewall-users] Tcrules
2006 Oct 13
0
Re: Tc rules Help with multiISP + squid& squidguard...
In policy : -----Message d''origine----- De : shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:shorewall-users-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] De la part de Tom Eastep Envoyé : jeudi 12 octobre 2006 21:22 À : Shorewall Users Objet : Re: [Shorewall-users] Tc rules Help with multiISP + squid& squidguard... Joffrey FLEURICE wrote: > > > All works, but no surf with