From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri May 12 15:32:12 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id PAA11883
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 12 May 1995 15:32:12 -0700
Received: from crh.cl.msu.edu (crh.cl.msu.edu [35.8.1.24])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id PAA11874
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 May 1995 15:32:10 -0700
Message-Id: <199505122232.PAA11874@freefall.cdrom.com>
Received: by crh.cl.msu.edu
	(1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA18454; Fri, 12 May 1995 18:32:08 -0400
From: Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu>
Subject: REMOTE_HOST & REMOTE_USER
To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 18:32:08 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 495       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

How do you folks feel about making inetd set the REMOTE_HOST variable to the
hostname/ip of the connected peer?  SGI's do this and it comes in quite handy.

Is inetd the right place (instead of login say?).  I keep debating between the
two, but for maximal benefit I think it should stay in inetd, and have login
preserve the value, or reset it..

Comments?

-Crh

    Charles Henrich     Michigan State University     henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu

                     http://rs560.msu.edu/~henrich/