Mhr wrote on Sat, 12 Dec 2009 12:09:17 -0800: > Now you've sparked my curiosity - how is the XP firewall any better than ZA? ZA is not just a firewall. Googling will tell you about the problems with it. > > Also, in regard to other answers I've seen on the list, since I'm > using NAT, isn't another firewall just a waste? A host firewall can still help against threats from within the network. Also, the XP firewall takes little ressources. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: Firewall for virtual machines
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Firewall for virtual machines
- From: Kai Schaetzl <maillists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:31:23 +0100
- Delivered-to: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <f4e013870912121209h7a1691f7i4780a1e129210569@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <f4e013870912111350p63a42dcevfe3a6167f5d4242b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <VA.000038e0.22ca0de3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <f4e013870912121209h7a1691f7i4780a1e129210569@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References:
- Firewall for virtual machines
- From: MHR
- Re: Firewall for virtual machines
- From: Kai Schaetzl
- Re: Firewall for virtual machines
- From: MHR
- Firewall for virtual machines
- Prev by Date: Re: Is ext4 safe for a production server?
- Next by Date: Re: Is ext4 safe for a production server?
- Previous by thread: Re: Firewall for virtual machines
- Next by thread: Re: Firewall for virtual machines
- Index(es):
 |