From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Mar 13 00:49:27 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id AAA14887
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:49:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA14880
          for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:49:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost.shockwave.com (localhost.shockwave.com [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA03007; Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199603130846.AAA03007@precipice.shockwave.com>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert), adf@fl.net.au,
        olah@cs.utwente.nl, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: finger and 2.2-960303-SNAP 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 12 Mar 1996 14:14:31 MST."
             <199603122114.OAA06574@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:46:25 -0800
From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


  From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
  Subject: Re: finger and 2.2-960303-SNAP
  > > "Fixed" is subjective.  It saves one response packet and loses
  > > interoperability.  8-(.
  > 
  > Only with broken TCP implementations like  the Annex's. We'll never see the
  > broken code change if no one complain and make them fix their bugs.
  
  This is a wonderful theory.
  
  To make it work, wouldn't the bug reports have to go to their lists
  instead of ours?

No, it's actually better if the bug reports come to US first.  The reason
being that most vendors would say "pshaw, you guys are idiots." whereas
there are a bunch of us on the mailing list who can point to the exact
bits of trivia in RFC-793 and sample "killer packets" to get these guys to
fix their TCP implementation.