I don't know if it supports RCS directly. I don't think so. The development team is small and tightly controlled. The files it generates are XML, so I don't think version control would be a problem or difficult to implement. I think FWbuilder would be an outstanding sys admin tool. It isn't that iptables are that hard, it is just that if you do it for a large number of machines or you only do it once in a while it is easy to get disorganized. I find that fwbuilder allows me (a relative fw newbie) to keep our firewalls organized. On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 10:12 -0600, Bryan W. Headley wrote: > Kim Lux wrote: > > >On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 09:29 -0600, Bryan W. Headley wrote: > > > > > >>Just checking: since iptables has system-config-securitylevel as its > >>frontend, what is better about FWBuilder in your mind? > >> > >> > > > >system-config-securitylevel only lets the user set a few things, like > >which ports are open. With FWBuilder, you can set up NAT, define times > >when specific ports are open, do port forwarding, block specific IPs, > >etc. You'd have to run it to see what I mean. > > > >I used it to set up NAT and port forwarding. > > > >One thing I really like about fwbuilder is that you can set up a fw > >configuration, save it as a file and employ it on all the machines on > >the network just by copying it to the other machines. > > > > > Initially complex-looking. Qt. But it looks like it'd be very > Enterprise-Friendly. RCS? (I like the premise of that; a real admin puts > everything into version control) > -- Kim Lux (Mr.) Diesel Research Inc