From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jun 23  0:35:18 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from axl.ops.uunet.co.za (axl.ops.uunet.co.za [196.31.2.163])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6757937B838
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:35:14 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sheldonh@axl.ops.uunet.co.za)
Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.ops.uunet.co.za)
	by axl.ops.uunet.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1)
	id 135NzO-000DIJ-00; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:34:58 +0200
From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
To: Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de>
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: inetd with -R -1 patch? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:37:00 +0200."
             <20000608123700.A22155@cichlids.cichlids.com> 
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:34:58 +0200
Message-ID: <51106.961745698@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:37:00 +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:

> What about that patch to let one use unlimited numbers of connections?
> The standard is still 256, but if one really wants that...

Personally, I'd prefer it if zero implied an unlimited number of
invokations per service per minute.  However, the special case isn't
really necessary, since you can simply specify some large number (and
then prepare to have your box dragged under). :-)

Ciao,
Sheldon.

PS: Did you test the patch you sent? :-)


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