I like this because it gives the user a choice, and it clearly lays out the
choices based on partition schemes instead of a less-specific 'machine use'
choice.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 17, 2012, at 4:46 PM, Polytropon wrote:
> Four? There should be five! :-)
>
> Read on to find out why.
>
I would prefer having the option of four partitions for fault tolerance reasons
if needed.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 17, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Devin Teske wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
>> questi...@freebsd.org] On Be
System: FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE running as a firewall (ipfw) and NAT for
192.168.1.0/24
Interfaces: xl0 (internal interface, 192.168.1.1)
sis0 (cable modem interface) (address assigned by DHCP)
HTTP connections across the firewall work fine (ie. web browsing) and I can
maintain a connectio
