> I have been watching the split DNS discussions and learned a lot of
> the issues, good and bad, for implementing such.
I think a good approach is to turn the problem on its head. What
most folks implement with "split DNS" is actually "split reFrom firewalls-owner Wed Feb 12 22:50:52 1997
Received: (majordom @
localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Lists-960417-1) id WAA11476 for firewalls-outgoing; Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:41:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhr.aster.com.pk (lhr.aster.com.pk [188.8.131.52]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Miles-960830-1) with SMTP id WAA11440 for <firewalls @
com>; Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lhr.aster.com.pk (Smail184.108.40.206 #4)
id m0vuuqO-0004HfC; Thu, 13 Feb 97 11:40 GMT+0500
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:40:32 +0500 (GMT+0500)
From: Rafeeq Ur Rehman <rehman @
To: Jim McKenzie <jmckenze @
cc: firewalls @
Subject: Re: What firewall do I need.
In-Reply-To: <199702130426 .
Message-ID: <Pine .
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: firewalls-owner @
On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Jim McKenzie wrote:
> I am about to hook our 130 PC lan running WFW, WIN95, & NT to a dedicated
> internet connection. What is my risk to hackers, etc. when we make this
> connection, what is the best firewall to use with the least setup and
> administrative work.
I am using FWTK on Linux in such a network with SUN, SCO Unix, and
Ultrix. I have found it good against test attacks. The LAN is on Internet
and running smoothly.
Rafeeq Ur Rehman