On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:00:46AM +0000, Asfand Yar Qazi wrote:
> http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Previews/nvnforce4/3.html
>
> You're right there - some semi-hardware support combined with drivers
> apparently result in lower CPU usage that software firewalls. Apparently.
>
> Actually, these people like it:
> http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=712&pageID=1096
>
> However one feature that you can't laugh at is the fact that it can be
> made to block packets in the span of time between the OS being loaded
> up, and the "real" firewall coming up. This small time span
> theoretically leaves the PC vulnerable, so I think this is the only
> use for "ActiveAmor Firewall".
Until the OS loads network drivers AND configures IP support AND starts
accepting packets in, there is nothing for the firewall to do.
Certainly on Linux I can make sure iptables is populated (or least has a
sane policy set) before I bring up networking. In other words: "Who
cares".
> However, this doesn't answer my original question (which I suppose I
> should have made clearer): can I get SATA II NCQ support in Linux with
> an nForce 4 chipset?
Don't know. I think 3ware's controllers do their own NCQ, which is
pretty neat.
Len Sorensen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
