From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Feb  9 23:49:37 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id XAA25505
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 23:49:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA25496
          for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 23:49:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA23359; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 23:48:48 -0800
To: KentH@HNS.St-Louis.Mo.US
cc: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer), terry@lambert.org,
        current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: FS PATCHES: THE NEXT GENERATION 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 10 Feb 1996 00:33:54 CST."
             <199602100633.AAA00595@gwydion.hns.st-louis.mo.us> 
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 23:48:48 -0800
Message-ID: <23357.823938528@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I *strongly* disagree with you.  If I change the dev's on my firewall 
> I expect 'em to damn well stay changed and the first time they don't
> I first go searching for the person that hacked the firewall, then
> finding nothing, I dump it and rebuild it from scratch assuming that
> I've just been badly beaten at my game.  Now you tell me that they won't
> stay that way?  I dump it and get a new o/s.

FWIW, this is almost word-for-word what the folks at USENIX told me
and Julian will almost certainly never convince me that this is a
problem that can be dismissed lightly.  I will fight long and hard for
compatibility because I happen to think that I'm 100% right about how
users will feel about this, and if no one else will speak for them,
I will.

					Jordan