From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jun 18 12:26:53 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA05301
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pandora.hh.kew.com (kendra.ne.highway1.com [24.128.53.73])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA05294
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from ahd@localhost)
	by pandora.hh.kew.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA04006;
	Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:26:15 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:26:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Drew Derbyshire <ahd@kew.com>
Message-Id: <199706181926.PAA04006@pandora.hh.kew.com>
To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, julian@whistle.com
Subject: Re: Adding a new feature to 2.2 series?
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

If you're hacking the code, add a wish for the ipfw command line
side, although not for 2.2.x ...

Consider parsing the port and IP address fields for the contents
of /etc/services, /etc/hosts and /etc/network.  I find the requirement
to use numerics to be extremely error prone.  I presume this is
currently done because NIS and DNS are not presumed to be available
when ipfw is run and the stock gethostbyname, etc. would attempt
to access these services.

So think about it ...
-ahd-