Proposal regarding the RFC 3514 handling
Peter Wemm
peter at wemm.org
Wed Apr 2 11:48:23 PST 2003
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 00:21:44 -0800 (PST)
> "Matthew N. Dodd" <mdodd at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> > mdodd 2003/04/01 00:21:44 PST
> >
> > FreeBSD src repository
> >
> > Modified files:
> > sbin/ping ping.8 ping.c
> > share/man/man4 inet.4 ip.4
> > sys/netinet in.h in_pcb.h ip.h ip_input.c ip_output.c
> > ip_var.h
> > usr.bin/netstat inet.c
> > Log:
> > Implement support for RFC 3514 (The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header).
>
> In the light of the actual "force" against this commit: perhaps it would
> be ok for all involved parties to only compile this code in based upon a
> kernel option...
Personally, I tend to agree.
> In my POV: people which don't know enough about this topic would IMHO
> not be concerned about this code, and people which know enough to have a
> reason to compile or not compile this code into the kernel should also
> know enough about FreeBSD to not regard this code as a lack of
> professionalism (and see it as what it is: there are people which enjoy
> to invest their time into FreeBSD... and this is what makes FreeBSD what
> it is).
Exactly. We're supposed to be doing FreeBSD for our own enjoyment. If
others get use from it then fine. The day that we're no longer allowed to
have fun because it might upset somebody in some fortune-500 company will
be a sad day indeed. Nobody said we had to be 100% deadly serious the
whole time.
.. as long as having a bit of fun doesn't get in the way.. An option would
stop it being in the code execution paths.
On the other hand, we have so much cruft in the ip input/output code paths
(2 or 3 different packet filter hooks etc), this is tiny by comparison.
Anyway, I think Matthew is going to to remove it, so maybe its a moot point.
Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter at wemm.org; peter at FreeBSD.org; peter at yahoo-inc.com
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
More information about the cvs-src
mailing list