Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(August 1997)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Historic firewall definition
From: Marty Gillespie <mgg @ dnaco . net>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 07:07:33 -0400 (EDT)
To: Don_Tompkins @ esd . tracor . com
Cc: firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM, "Bruce K. Marshall" <bkmarsh @ feist . com>
In-reply-to: <00014659 . 1688 @ esd . tracor . com>

and Bellovin in his previous e-mail in this thread said " we were able to
track down was in some email that I sent in, I believe, 1987.  The first
occurrence in print was by Spafford, in 1991."

                       Marty G.

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 Don_Tompkins @
 esd .
 tracor .
 com wrote:

>      'Firewalls' as Bellovin and others have written about in some fine 
>      texts are boundary or barrier devices (multilevel) and more akin to 
>      classic network gateways that permit or deny traffic based on some set 
>      of rules. At a primitive level, classic routers performed some gateway 
>      functions. Modern routers provide more sophisticated capability and 
>      work well in conjunction with firewalls. Network protection or 
>      recovery could be included in gateway functions (valuable in packet 
>      networks) but I don;t think of them as primary functions. 
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
> Subject: Historic firewall definition
> Author:  "Bruce K. Marshall" <bkmarsh @
 feist .
 com> at ESD
> Date:    8/26/97 10:22 PM
> 
> 
> I was recently browsing through the 1992 copyrighted edition 
> of_Interconnections: Bridges and Routers_ by Radia Perlman when I 
> stumbled upon an interesting definition of a firewall.  Radia writes:
>      
>     "With most networks, malfunctions can cause widespread disruption. 
> Some networks, however, are designed with ''firewalls.''  If a network 
> is partitioned into pieces by firewalls, a disruption will spread only 
> as far as a firewall and will therefore affect only a portion of the 
> network."
>      
>     So, my curiosity was perked into wondering whether firewalls
> originally filled this purpose before they became more orientated to 
> protecting networks or whether this was simply a competing definition. 
> Any definitive answers or good guesses? 
>      
>     In a general sense though, I would think that this definition isn't
> truly in conflict with what we call "firewalls" today seeing as how 
> security incidents can be easily classified as disruptions.  These days, 
> I think we could probably even get away with classifying most of the 
> Internet as a disruption..
>      
> -- 
>   ___________________________________________________________________ 
>   Bruce K. Marshall, CISSP - bkmarsh @
 feist .
 com - Feist Communications 
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    "Specialists in using today's advanced communications technology
>                  to ensure the future of your business."
> 



References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Problems with FW-1's asmtp
From: Konstantin Agouros <Konstantin_Agouros @ genua . de>
Next: Re: DNS setup
From: sar <sar @ cynicism . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Historic firewall definition
From: Don_Tompkins @ esd . tracor . com
Next: Re: Historic firewall definition
From: "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr @ nfr . net>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com