From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Aug  6 18:31:00 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA21058
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.210.193])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA21053;
          Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (tom@localhost) by misery.sdf.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA05900; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Samplonius <tom@sdf.com>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@freefall.freebsd.org>
cc: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: I have 3 patches 
In-Reply-To: <199608070036.RAA18149@freefall.freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.94.960806184234.5893A-100000@misery.sdf.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Julian Elischer wrote:

> I'd like to submit and check in 2 pathches.
> they add functionality to inetd and ftpd$
> 
> Basically they allow each to run against a single interface.
> This allows a machine to present totally different services on the
> inside and outside of  a firewall system.
> 
> The patches are on freefall in ~julian
> or in www.whistle.com/people/julian
> 
> I'd like to commit them soon (tomorrow?)
> 
> julian
> 
> 
> 

  xinetd (in ports) already does this.  I'm against extending the current
inetd because of this.

  xinetd also has access control, and can limit active processes per
service.

Tom