Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:10:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Gordon Tetlow <gordont@bluemtn.net> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> Cc: James Howard <howardjp@well.com>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net>, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca>, <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: telnet to AF_UNIX sockets [PATCH] Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0105241105210.76720-100000@sdmail0.sd.bmarts.com> In-Reply-To: <20010523220844.A26487@shade.nectar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > You are not the only one. I can appreciate the `neat' factor, but I > cringed at the commit. It seems like functionality that would be > better put in a separate utility (or port even). It's not like you'd > ever want to run the NVT protocol over an AF_UNIX socket. It depends on how you look at it. If you see telnet as a network client, then you cringe at this (I did initially). But when you think about it, all telnet really does is connect to sockets, so why not extend its functionality to local sockets? -gordon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.33.0105241105210.76720-100000>