From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Feb 16 18:48:35 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id SAA11339 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 16 Feb 1995 18:48:35 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA11332; Thu, 16 Feb 1995 18:48:34 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.cdrom.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: Andras Olah <olah@cs.utwente.nl>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: tcpdump 3.0? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 16 Feb 1995 17:36:20 +0100."
             <14093.792952580@utis156.cs.utwente.nl> 
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 18:48:34 -0800
Message-ID: <11330.792989314@freefall.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com>
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

There's still a lot of problems in integrating his stuff - the last
set of patches he sent me did not result in a compilable tcpdump, and
so it's probably unreasonable to assume that tcpdump is going to get
updated for 2.1.  I would therefore just apply your patches now and
we can worry about 3.0 integration later..

Thanks!

					Jordan


> I've got some patches for tcpdump to make it understand the RFC-1323
> and RFC-1644 TCP options, but I remember Michael Reifenberger
> mentioning that he has the new version (3.0) ported already.  Should
> I wait for 3.0 before submitting the patches, because the current
> tree has still v2.2.1?
> 
> Andras