From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 29 03:24:45 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 997A616A4CE; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 03:24:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from horsey.gshapiro.net (horsey.gshapiro.net [64.105.95.154])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 54F8543D2F; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 03:24:45 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gshapiro@gshapiro.net)
Received: from horsey.gshapiro.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	i8T3OJuh075769
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 28 Sep 2004 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from gshapiro@localhost)
	by horsey.gshapiro.net (8.13.1/8.13.1.Beta1/Submit) id i8T3OI6D075768;
	Tue, 28 Sep 2004 20:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 20:24:18 -0700
From: Gregory Neil Shapiro <gshapiro@freebsd.org>
To: Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040929032418.GD56445@horsey.gshapiro.net>
References: <20040928025635.Q5094@ync.qbhto.arg>
	<727FCC18-1156-11D9-BBA6-000D936BE398@beforever.com>
	<20040928142532.M90002@qbhto.arg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040928142532.M90002@qbhto.arg>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
cc: Peter Schultz <pete@beforever.com>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: HEADS UP: named now runs chroot'ed by default
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 03:24:45 -0000

> The simplest answer is that not every host can burn (or even obtain) an 
> extra IP address for the jail. It's also questionable what additional 
> benefit would be obtained.
> 
> Of course, if someone else finds the time to implement this, I will give 
> it a serious look. I'm not _opposed_ to the idea.

If someone does so, please make it optional as jails don't support
IPv6 yet and BIND 9 does.