Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 05 Sep 1998 22:51:26 -0700
From:      David Greenman <dg@root.com>
To:        Tom <tom@uniserve.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Should FreeBSD-3.0 ship with RFC 1644 (T/TCP) turned off by 
Message-ID:  <199809060551.WAA10205@implode.root.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 05 Sep 1998 10:28:28 PDT." <Pine.BSF.3.96.980905102431.6991D-100000@shell.uniserve.ca> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
>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's assertion about the Livingston being broken is the first I've
seen. Previously all of the reports of brokeness were with Annex terminal
servers.

-DG

David Greenman
Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809060551.WAA10205>