2006/6/30, Lukas Ocilka <lukas.ocilka@suse.cz>:
Actually, yast2-firewall has been proposed to be used by common users. With some [Advanced] configuration for advanced users (or Server settings).
Xinetd configuration is a bit different and it's not suitable for common users. From my point of view, it's one badly-arranged table of settings.
Firewall configuration is set of more features divided into smaller dialogs. Considering the fact, that firewall plays with the security of the system, it should be as simple as possible and there should be listed as few entries as possible. That's why the firewall has also the
Everything you say as long as usability improves beyond current level :) One good windows example of this that comes to mind is visnetic firewall. Which also AFAIK I remember from my head has options for monitoring built in. Now combining the options to control speed/resources would be extremely welcome too as a part of a more complete solution. Angain just thoughts and ideas. I hope this makes sense Johan Summary screen before saving the configuration.
Lukas
Johan N. wrote:
Just a thought here ...
Have a look at the yast setup for xinetd and go this route, when thinking of the UI
It would be so nice to have something similar for the setup of SuSEfirewall2
Johan
2006/6/30, Ludwig Nussel <ludwig.nussel@suse.de>:
On Friday 30 June 2006 09:32, Lukas Ocilka wrote:
Well, having these services well-defined by packages themselves seems to be a good idea, on the other hand too many defined services might
make
the UI almost unusable :)
The listbox becomes shorter as it would only contain what's actually installed and a default install doesn't include most of the stuff that's currently offered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory-unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory-help@opensuse.org