From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Aug 19 10:32:10 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA16090
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from red.jnx.com (ppp-206-170-2-24.sntc01.pacbell.net [206.170.2.24])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA16058;
          Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from base.jnx.com (base.jnx.com [208.197.169.238]) by red.jnx.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA18268; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from base.jnx.com (localhost.jnx.com [127.0.0.1]) by base.jnx.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA18953; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:31:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199608191731.KAA18953@base.jnx.com>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@current1.whistle.com>
cc: wollman@freebsd.org, candy@fct.kgc.co.jp, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org,
        olah@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: bin/649 - fix questions (tcpdump / print-atalk.c) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 18 Aug 1996 17:18:36 PDT."
             <Pine.BSF.3.95.960818171705.13481A-100000@current1.whistle.com> 
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:31:47 -0700
From: Paul Traina <pst@jnx.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

OK, but please filter the tcpdump changes (if any) DIRECTLY back to me, do
not patch tcpdump.

  From: Julian Elischer <julian@current1.whistle.com>
  Subject: Re: bin/649 - fix questions (tcpdump / print-atalk.c)
  
  
  On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, Paul Traina wrote:
  
  > Back in September, you made a change to tcpdump's print-atalk.c code to
  > fix PR # 649.  One of the changes was to print appletalk addresses in hex.
  > This is not, to the best of my knowledge, correct.  Every network monitor o
>>r
  > router that I've seen (cisco, gatorbox, et al) use decimal for the network
  > number and node address.
  
  As do our own netstat ifconfig and route
  
  BTW
  I have some fixes to un-break
  the atalk protocol stack I'll be committing in teh next few days..
  
  > 
  > I'd like to back this change out as part of the upgrade to the current tcpd
>>ump
  > so that we return to canonical address displays.
  > 
  > Objections?
  >