Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 20:16:53 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Thomas Valentino Crimi <tcrimi+@andrew.cmu.edu>, security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BPF on in 3.3-RC GENERIC kernel Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19990915201332.048da870@localhost> In-Reply-To: <4rs2bkG00UwE10yxw0@andrew.cmu.edu> References: <4.2.0.58.19990915164546.048d0100@localhost> <4.2.0.58.19990915164546.048d0100@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:21 PM 9/15/99 -0400, Thomas Valentino Crimi wrote: > This was discussed in much detail earlier, but here is the short and >skinny on it: > > DHCP, particularly during installation, is _VERY_ handy. As networks >are being configured today, there are many users that may end up being >left out in the cold, or hat least aving to go through a particular >amount of effort to install. I agree that DHCP is handy, and I don't want to dredge up old ghosts. But the above begs the question: Why is DHCP handled through BPF? > Let's not unncessarily bring up this thread again, so test all posible >arguments against the archives :) A new breakthrough would probably be >welcome, though. In my mind, the general doesn't-recompile-the-kernel >user would especilly not go through the hoops it may take to install >without DHCP support. Which leads to the idea of a kernel config option, similar to the one that lets you set flags for syscons. Maybe this would be the way to turn it on during install but turn it off afterward if it was not needed. Hmmm.... How do you make a driver show up in the configuration editor? --Brett 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?4.2.0.58.19990915201332.048da870>