[ntp:questions] NTP on small 100% Linux LAN : reasonable access control policy ?

Rob nomail at example.com
Tue Aug 3 09:09:31 UTC 2010


Kiss Gabor <kissg at ssg.ki.iif.hu> wrote:
> In article <slrni5fh3t.om8.nomail at xs8.xs4all.nl>,
> 	Rob <nomail at example.com> writes:
>>>> restrict default 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0
>> 
>> It should be: restrict 127.0.0.1 mask 255.0.0.0
>
> Do you mean "restrict 127.0.0.0 mask 255.0.0.0"? :)
> Several IP stack implementations refuse 1 bits on masked out positions.

Well that may be even better, and of course the mask can simply be
omitted.  I was mainly pointing at the word "default" that appeared
in the line and it should not be there.




More information about the questions mailing list