Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 17:47:10 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jobaldwi@vt.edu> To: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> Subject: Re: Inetd and wrapping. Message-ID: <199906212147.RAA03166@smtp4.erols.com> In-Reply-To: <9906211413.aa28663@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21-Jun-99 David Malone wrote: >> Folks, public feedback on the following portion of David's mail would be >> much appreciated. Since resolution of UDP wrapping would bring about the >> execution of the "we want tcpd" campaign, it's obviously something that >> both David and I would like to see finished off. > > I got one person who suggested a flag in inetd.conf which could disable > wrapping for a service. This seems like quite a good idea if we can come > up with an acceptable syntax for the flag. > > David. I suppose you could a field wrap/nowrap like the wait/nowait field.. but then you'd be butchering the sacred cow of the inetd.conf format... possibly in a non-backwards-compatible fashion. Or you could ugly-hack it using "wait/wait-wrap/nowait/nowait-wrap" which would be backwards compatible, but ugly nonetheless. Just some ideas. HTH. Personally, I would vote for the first solution, but it may not be practical. --- John Baldwin <jobaldwi@vt.edu> -- http://members.freedomnet.com/~jbaldwin/ PGP Key: http://members.freedomnet.com/~jbaldwin/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906212147.RAA03166>