Re: Firewalls that generate new packets..

["Paul D. Robertson" <paul () compuwar net>]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Chris Blask wrote:

> technical and marketing aspects of such things.  It is
> therefore also quite defensibly true what Bill said: <sic>
> "That is on purpose".

This is the part I have serious troubles with- "on purpose" implies that 
it was a pre-planned, thought-out event, not that you just didn't screw it 
up by not doing anything[1].  The code bases _started out differently_ for 
no reason other than the fact that the products were from different 
companies, on two different platforms.  To paint that fact as if it were 
some sort of strategic plan does the readers of this list a disservice.

> PS - Paul R, my posts seem to again not be making the list,

The list is still moderated, it takes the moderator some time to get 
through the queue...

Paul
[1]  From what I recall when Cisco was repeatedly trying to get me to buy 
in to the fact that PIX should be on my list of approved firewalls at 
Gannett, one of the points they kept trying to make was that PIX was 
getting more IOS features to make it easier for folks to deal with a 
single interface- so it would seem to me that even the keeping them apart 
wasn't necessarily a planned event.  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal opinions
paul () compuwar net       which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
             http://www.fluiditgroup.com/blog/pdr/
           Art: http://PaulDRobertson.imagekind.com/


_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards