2 ms·
I love it, but it's not a wrapper. It's just a dead-simple mechanism for making iptables persistent. The cool thing is that /etc/iptables/rules.v4 and /etc/ipt
by mirimir 8y ago
I love it, but it's not a wrapper. It's just a dead-simple mechanism for making iptables persistent.
The cool thing is that /etc/iptables/rules.v4 and /etc/iptables/rules.v6 get loaded at bootup. So if you're living dangerously, you just use /etc/iptables/test-rules.v4 or whatever. If you get locked out, just reboot the server. Or have it rebooted, if you don't have a management console.
- sadris 8y agoTest with the live iptables state. Then you can save it with iptables-save > rules.v4 Why do you need a wrapper at all? I looked at shorewall ten years ago and it just made everything more complicated than just doing it raw. Term is also nice because it still uses iptables syntax.
- mirimir 8y agoI'm sure that there are other ways to manage multiple sets of iptables rules. I've just found iptables-persistent to be the easiest. I do agree on the iptables vs wrapper issue. I started out using Shorewall, and then ufw. But once I started learning iptables, I decided that it was simpler to just use it.