From owner-freebsd-security  Thu Feb  4 03:11:01 1999
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA25804
          for freebsd-security-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 03:11:01 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from nomad.dataplex.net (nomad.dataplex.net [208.2.87.8])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA25799
          for <security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 03:10:59 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net)
Received: from localhost (rkw@localhost)
	by nomad.dataplex.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA66188;
	Thu, 4 Feb 1999 05:10:40 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net)
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 05:10:40 -0600 (CST)
From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>
To: Chris Larsen <vader@vader.dk>
cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Enabling bpf device in kernel (was: Re: tcpdump)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990204095555.10265F-100000@www.babel.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902040505560.66070-100000@nomad.dataplex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

In a dhcp environment, it (presently) is!
I think that the world is moving toward dhcp as the primary method of
learning appropriate IP configuration data.
Cable modems systems, etc. require it. 
We need the dhcp client in /sbin and enabled by default.
It is always possible to override this with static addresses.
The inverse is not true.

On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Chris Larsen wrote:
> Is bpf critical in getting a system up and running ? i think
> not.


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