From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Sep 12 06:48:44 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA04056
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 12 Sep 1997 06:48:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (word.smith.net.au [202.0.75.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA04040
          for <FreeBSD-Hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Sep 1997 06:48:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.smith.net.au [127.0.0.1])
	by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA03165;
	Fri, 12 Sep 1997 23:16:46 +1000 (EST)
Message-Id: <199709121316.XAA03165@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: Jamie Bowden <jamie@itribe.net>
cc: FreeBSD-Hackers <FreeBSD-Hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: network programming. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 12 Sep 1997 08:57:07 -0400."
             <199709121249.IAA17231@gatekeeper.itribe.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 22:46:45 +0930
From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> If tcpdump does all traffic on an interface, shouldn't it be renamed to
> reflect that capability?  Not having used tcpdump, based on the name, I
> would have thought it was for monitoring tcp traffic, and wouldn't do udp.

How about you send some mail to "tcpdump@ee.lbl.gov" and tell *them* 
about this?  It's not like this is something that was dreamed up last 
week or anything.

mike