Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Dec 2000 12:53:22 -0500
From:      Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
To:        opentrax@email.com, dr@kyx.net
Cc:        tcpdump-workers@tcpdump.org, ethereal-dev@ethereal.com, snort-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, tech@openbsd.org
Subject:   Re: Fwd: kyxtech: freebsd outsniffed by wintendo !!?!?
Message-ID:  <5.0.0.25.0.20001216124841.01e27c20@mail.etinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <200012121436.GAA03155@spammie.svbug.com>
References:  <0012072118150Q.09615@smp.kyx.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Im confused as to what difference it makes? No production server should 
ever use bpf for any "performance" oriented function  anyway.

Plus if you are doing network testing you should write to dev/null or a ram 
disk or better yet dump the packets rather than store them, Every disk will 
be different so you need to get that variable out of the equation.

DB



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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.0.0.25.0.20001216124841.01e27c20>