| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:22:26 -0400 |
| 3 |
Marko Mikulicic <marko@××××.org> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> may I ask you why do you prefer the /proc variant ? I have no |
| 7 |
> prejudice on both, |
| 8 |
> but I'm wondering why there is some many "sysctl" based scripts |
| 9 |
> (in other distros). |
| 10 |
less spawning of programs (fewer threads == faster and less disk |
| 11 |
accessing on a low-ram machine ) |
| 12 |
implementation is simpler in many cases (less prone to error since I'm |
| 13 |
more used to shell syntax) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> I thought iptables was the "IP packet filter". Ip forwarding |
| 17 |
> can be used for other things, like openvpn tunneling or other |
| 18 |
> routing stuff which doesn't depend on iptables, right? What if I don't |
| 19 |
> have installed iptables ? Where it should go then ? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Well, net, bootmisc is one thing, but I have it in my iptables script |
| 22 |
because thats where I tune my other firewall/network related settings, |
| 23 |
syncookies, high/low ports and memory threshholds as well as my port |
| 24 |
forwarding and ip forwarding rules, and ecn bit settings. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
as for your idea on more scripts, I prefer to keep them less, means less |
| 28 |
overhead and fewer points of failure in the caching mechanism.. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
//Spider |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
begin .signature |
| 34 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 35 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 36 |
end |
Archives