From owner-freebsd-current Sat Sep 5 10:29:58 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20178 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:29:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pop.uniserve.com (pop.uniserve.com [204.244.156.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA20172 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:29:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tom@uniserve.com) Received: from shell.uniserve.ca [204.244.186.218] by pop.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #4) id 0zFM8U-000084-00; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:28:30 -0700 Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:28:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom X-Sender: tom@shell.uniserve.ca To: Terry Lambert cc: ben@rosengart.com, archie@whistle.com, sthaug@nethelp.no, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Should FreeBSD-3.0 ship with RFC 1644 (T/TCP) turned off by In-Reply-To: <199809050757.AAA00885@usr08.primenet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 5 Sep 1998, Terry Lambert wrote: > The problem is not the options, per se, but the fact that some > systems failed to mplement correct option negotiation, per > RFC 793, for previously non-existant options. > > Livingston Portmasters were one known offender. ... > Thus you would actualy puke bad equipment into non-operability. ... Ugh... really? I use Livingston Portmaster's and FreeBSD heavily. Be aware that (depending on the model) Portmasters have had a long history, and some sites are still running 4 year old firmware on them. Always get the ComOS version. > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message