From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 22 08:37:14 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC6216A400 for ; Tue, 22 May 2007 08:37:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B170813C48A for ; Tue, 22 May 2007 08:37:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320682086; Tue, 22 May 2007 10:37:10 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on tim.des.no Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA142084; Tue, 22 May 2007 10:37:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7BB8D57A1; Tue, 22 May 2007 10:37:09 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Ian FREISLICH References: Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 10:37:09 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Ian FREISLICH's message of "Tue\, 22 May 2007 07\:19\:11 +0200") Message-ID: <86zm3xmeyy.fsf@dwp.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Jack Vogel Subject: Re: em0 hijacking traffic to port 623 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 08:37:15 -0000 Ian FREISLICH writes: > No, it's a March 6 current. How safe is it to just update the > sys/dev/em directory and recompile? Quite a lot has changed in > CURRENT since then and I don't want to update everything on these > servers just yet. Quick workaround: configure inetd to listen to port 623 so rpcbind won't assign these ports to the NFS server. Something like this: asf-rmcp dgram udp nowait root /bin/false false asf-rmcp stream tcp nowait root /bin/false false DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no