Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 14:54:36 +0200 From: peter@bsdly.net (Peter N. M. Hansteen) To: "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org, Richard Cooke <rcooke@rcoa.ac.uk> Subject: Re: |FreeBSD Handbook feedback Message-ID: <877issti43.fsf@thingy.datadok.no> In-Reply-To: <cb5206420704040500k3cb80763w23b260a0157677a5@mail.gmail.com> (Andrew Pantyukhin's message of "Wed, 4 Apr 2007 16:00:01 %2B0400") References: <BB11623D93D00A4B83E9D08081715E6069B0E2@rcoa2.rcoa.int> <cb5206420704040500k3cb80763w23b260a0157677a5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org> writes: > To add the info into Handbook might be a good idea, but I > just can't help smiling when I try to imagine how cvsup > working through a dedicated tcp port can cause frustration. The trend in packet filtering is to go for a default deny policy, and we should expect users to find themselves behind filtering gateways (aka firewalls) these days. I haven't actually checked, but it would not surprise me to find that significant chunks of the handbook were originally written when the net was generally open and unfiltered. Mentioning that the program needs a particular port open would quite possibly remove that particular cause of frustration for more cvsup newbies. > /etc/services is your friend. Oh, certainly. But it does not make the original suggestion less valid. -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/ http://www.datadok.no/ http://www.nuug.no/ "First, we kill all the spammers" The Usenet Bard, "Twice-forwarded tales" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?877issti43.fsf>