From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Sep 25 12:55:46 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA20418
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:55:46 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA20413
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:55:40 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id FAA29047; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:50:55 +1000
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:50:55 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199509251950.FAA29047@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org
Subject: Re: kernel versions and config's rm -rf
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, fenner@parc.xerox.com
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>> >I'm wondering at the existance of compile time optioning in the first
>> >place.  Really, it exists because the device driver and other subsystems
>> >don't have explicit registration mechanisms that don't depend on static
>> >data.
>> 
>> No, it exists because static configuration is easier to implement and
>> has less bloat.

>Why wasn't it use for IP forwarding and TCP/IP RFC 1323 and RFC 1644
>compliance configuration, then?

They were introduced in the 1990's by 1990's-aware authors.

Bruce