> Sure, sounds secure, but not very useful. I happen to like things like > mbone, name resolution, nfs mounting internet archives, talk, the variety of > games that require UDP, FSP, etc. > Name Resolution can be used fine though a firewall, just takes a little of coaxing. Reguarding MBONE & NFS, well hopefully we all know their inherent risks, and you obviously put funtionality before security. Other companies security policies may differ. > > The product seems pretty good from what I've read thus far. > > Well, then Winn suckered you in. :-) Just be warned, you can duplicate > perhaps 98% of the functionality for free, and it won't even require > any programming. In fact, you can probably get more functionality, > since I'm sure UDP proxies exist. > Yes, you can duplicate just about everything it's doing, other than packet filtering based on the data content (as far as I know, no public package is available to do that). I would also agree you could get more functionality if you're putting together your own homebrew of security remedies. > Well, you're confusing public recognition with knowledge. SCTC is > probably more well known in their (DoD?) circles than Ches or Bellovin. > Besides, AT&T may have a grudge. :-) > Yes, obviously SCTC would be a much better evaluator.