[Firehol-support] "protection strong" on routes
costa at tsaousis.gr
Sat Apr 22 12:14:57 BST 2006
Well, I am a little bit confused.
We need "flood" and "bad-packets" or "strong-without-flood"?
On the other hand, increasing the frequency and burst level does not fix
the issue with flood matches?
Jean-Michel Hiver wrote:
> Carlos Rodrigues a écrit :
>> "protection bad-packets" sounds better and is more expressive than
>> "protection basic".
> I agree. So the pitch would be:
> - protection strong
> - protection flood
> - protection bad-packets
> Sounds good to me. Now let's pray the gods of programmer's goodwill /
> inspiration and hope it makes it in the next release - I'll be
> sacrificing a black chicken :)
More information about the Firehol-support