Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Tom <tom@uniserve.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Cc:        ben@rosengart.com, archie@whistle.com, sthaug@nethelp.no, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Should FreeBSD-3.0 ship with RFC 1644 (T/TCP) turned off by
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.980905102431.6991D-100000@shell.uniserve.ca>
In-Reply-To: <199809050757.AAA00885@usr08.primenet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sat, 5 Sep 1998, Terry Lambert wrote:

> The problem is not the options, per se, but the fact that some
> systems failed to mplement correct option negotiation, per
> RFC 793, for previously non-existant options.
> 
> Livingston Portmasters were one known offender.
...
> Thus you would actualy puke bad equipment into non-operability.
...

  Ugh... really?  I use Livingston Portmaster's and FreeBSD heavily.

  Be aware that (depending on the model) Portmasters have had a long
history, and some sites are still running 4 year old firmware on them.
Always get the ComOS version.


> 					Terry Lambert
> 					terry@lambert.org
> ---
> Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> or previous employers.

Tom


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980905102431.6991D-100000>