Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 09:44:20 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: dg@root.com Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, imp@village.org (Warner Losh), liam@tiora.net (Liam Slusser), kdrobnac@mission.mvnc.edu (Kenny Drobnack), Harry_M_Leitzell@cmu.edu (Harry M. Leitzell), security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BPF on in 3.3-RC GENERIC kernel Message-ID: <14956.937727060@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 19 Sep 1999 00:39:55 PDT." <199909190739.AAA20828@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As I said I'm willing to add a version number field. In message <199909190739.AAA20828@implode.root.com>, David Greenman writes: > Would be nice if there was something there for compatilibity when this >finally does occur, however. > >-DG > >David Greenman >Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org >Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com >Pave the road of life with opportunities. > >>Final email from here: >> >>Matt, you have not done anything to show that changing the ip_number >>field to a sockaddr will be enough to support IPv6 or any other >>protocol in the future. Remember that IPv4 is a very simple >>protocol, most others are not, in particular IPv6 it seems. >> >>I do not see a reason to change an interface which is already >>deployed, and which have been so for more than 1.5 years, "just in >>case it might be enough to support IPv6." >> >>I will therefore not make any changes to the jail(2) syscalls >>arguments until such time as we know what arguments will actually >>be needed for jail(2) under IPv6, or any other protocol for that >>matter. >> >>Poul-Henning >> >>In message <199909190634.XAA68995@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon writes: >>> >>>:You have not proved or even shown that changing this particular >>>:element will be enough to guarantee that we can support other >>>:protocols in the future. >>>: >>>:The only thing that can be done to the jail(2) syscall to improve >>>:it in that respect is to add a version number as the first element, >>>:I would have no problem with that. >>>: >>>:-- >>>:Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member >>> >>> Well, I see it quite differently. I believe I have given ample >>> justification for asking that the system call be cleaned up before it >>> is exposed to wider use. You're making a blanket comments saying >>> "Matt hasn't proved..." and not even trying to address the issues >>> brought up doesn't really pull any weight with me. Try addressing >>> the issues that were brought up instead. >>> >>> -Matt >>> Matthew Dillon >>> <dillon@backplane.com> >>> >>> >>>To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >>>with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message >>> >> >>-- >>Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member >>phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." >>FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! >> >> >>To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >>with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14956.937727060>