Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:24:54 -0600 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: chris@calldei.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSDI giving out old info? Message-ID: <3741BE86.54C4512B@softweyr.com> References: <199905181535.IAA28631@usr08.primenet.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Terry Lambert wrote:
>
> > > HTTP accelerator ???
> >
> > What is an HTTP accelerator, anyway?
>
> A cache.
Pretty much. A smart cache, maybe. In FreeBSD, you pronounce it "squid."
> > > ActiveX MSP (bleh!)
>
> ActiveX is pretty trivial to implement, if you know C++, and know to
> type:
>
> #define interface struct
>
> The COM and DCOM books describe it in sufficient detail that it can
> be implemented. The one caveat is that EGCS vtable support sucks.
Another caveat is that ActiveX is a giant can of bugs waiting to be released.
Do we really WANT to advertise support for ActiveX? I thought not.
> > > VPN Support
> > > IPsec ???
> > > ISAKMP ???
>
> These are supported via the WIDE/INRIA/LANL code, though the WIDE stuff
> appears more mature. FreeBSD is not, however, shipping it.
3rd party?
> > > PPTP ???
>
> This use GRE, and is similarly trivial, although interoperability with
> the NT code is not, and the security sucks (open to man in the middle
> and replay attacks). FreeBSD is not shipping it.
3rd party, or "why would you want to do that?"
> > > RAS MSP ???
>
> RAS is "Remote access server". It means dial on demand PPP with
> network address translation, generally.
But BSDI has that, too, so they must applying some other definition to it.
Screw it, I'm changing it to "Std." Userland PPP wins again! ;^)
> > > Management
> > > SMNP Tools (Too bad they can't spell SNMP, huh?) BIY
> >
> > I consider ports not to be BIY...
>
> On the other hand, the port doesn't come with a MIB that lets you
> actually manage a FreeBSD box. FreeBSD boxes don't have sufficiently
> centralized configuration data, and what data there is is cached all
> over the place, instead of reacquired. Someone really ought to look
> into a socket implementation that binds to interfaces instead of to
> IP addresses (e.g. an interface-bound INADDR_ANY). Oh wait, I _am_
> looking into that... ;^).
You seem to assume other vendors have *working* SNMP implementations also.
I can testify from first-hand experience that this is only sort of true.
Working == works great if you use OUR management application to manage
OUR switches/servers/hosts.
> > > Advanced Features
> > > IPv6 It was developed on FreeBSD! Yes
> >
> > I wonder why they put N/A, then.
>
> FreeBSD is not shipping it, and it is not a package.
3rd party then, right?
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
http://www.softweyr.com/~softweyr wes@softweyr.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3741BE86.54C4512B>