From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Oct 1 17:13: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from grumpy.dyndns.org (user-24-214-57-209.knology.net [24.214.57.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E5737B40D for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2001 17:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumpy.dyndns.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f920Cxw37586; Mon, 1 Oct 2001 19:13:00 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dkelly@grumpy.dyndns.org) Message-Id: <200110020013.f920Cxw37586@grumpy.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Edwin Groothuis Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG From: David Kelly Subject: Re: Berkeley packet filter In-reply-to: Message from Edwin Groothuis of "Mon, 01 Oct 2001 21:22:19 +1000." <20011001212219.J482@k7.mavetju.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 19:12:59 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Edwin Groothuis writes: > > IIRC, GENERIC warns you to be wary of the consequences of _disabling_ bpf. > > # The `bpf' pseudo-device enables the Berkeley Packet Filter. Be > # aware of the legal and administrative consequences of enabling this > # option. ... It would be nice if the above could additionally say, "DHCP needs bpf". My kernel config is so noted because I have a tendancy to remove bpf on being scared off by the above note. Every year or so I get bit again setting up another machine for somebody else... -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message