Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 05:41:35 +1000 (EST) From: michael butler <imb@scgt.oz.au> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: flamage in comp.security.unix .. Message-ID: <199509241941.FAA16757@asstdc.scgt.oz.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As usual, the Linux vs. *BSD wars continue to rage :-(. This time, in comp.security.unix; a (slightly trimmed) excerpt .. From: ig25@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (Thomas Koenig) Subject: Re: Firewall platform of choice Date: 22 Sep 1995 21:16:41 +0200 Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Universit=E4t_Karlsruhe_(TH),_Germany_?= Message-ID: <43v22p$8sp@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> Reply-To: Thomas.Koenig@ciw.uni-karlsruhe.de In comp.security.unix, peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) wrote: >No, they didn't. Linux is rather unique among the UNIX and UNIX clone >systems in that they did their own IP rather than taking advantage of the >reference implementation in BSD. >There were arguably good reasons at the time for doing so (the USL lawsuit >against BSDI and the CSRG), but since then there have been two new releases >of blessed code. Surely it's time to abandon NIH and import the good stuff. Not necessarily. BSD networking didn't get everything right, not by a long shot; violating RFC 1123 by not passing back ICMP errors resulting from UDP sockets is only one example. Right now (1.2.13 for Linux, the latest production release), Linux networking is working fairly well. == end quote == Does this inconsistency with the RFCs still exist in FreeBSD ? Is it worth addressing (or any others known) ? Perception is a delicate thing which, unfortunately, may only loosely related to the truth. I'm assuming that this adherence (or otherwise) has little (if any) impact on the security of a *BSD system but, not knowing enough about the issues, this seemed like the best place to ask .. michael
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509241941.FAA16757>