From owner-cvs-all Fri Jun 16 11:16:31 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from Awfulhak.org (tun.AwfulHak.org [194.242.139.173]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BFD37BFDF; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:16:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (root@hak.lan.awfulhak.org [172.16.0.12]) by Awfulhak.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA07548; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 19:10:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA00670; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:37:50 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Message-Id: <200006161737.SAA00670@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Garrett Wollman Cc: Bill Fumerola , "Daniel C. Sobral" , Alfred Perlstein , Nate Williams , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, brian@hak.lan.awfulhak.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern uipc_socket.c uipc_socket2.c src/sys/sys socket.h In-Reply-To: Message from Garrett Wollman of "Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:42:11 EDT." <200006161442.KAA17805@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:37:48 +0100 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > < said: > > > If natd had been written in the kernel (which no-one would have objected > > to), you would have the exact above scenario. > > I would have, strenuously. Is there a big difference between natd and ipnat ? Or do you object to ipnat ? > -GAWollman -- Brian Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message