Archives
Archives
| From: | Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] iptables (not) started? | ||
| Date: | Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:37:40 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20130329203720.223c1567@digimed.co.uk | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] iptables (not) started? by Mick |
||
| 1 | On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 19:44:14 +0000, Mick wrote: |
| 2 | |
| 3 | > Why do wikis and the like suggest that iptables should be in default |
| 4 | > rather than boot runlevel? |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Why not? There's no need to start it especially early, as long as it is |
| 7 | running before the network comes up, and the init script takes care of |
| 8 | that. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | |
| 11 | -- |
| 12 | Neil Bothwick |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Vuja De: the feeling that you've never been here before. |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] iptables (not) started? | Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> |