Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 11:10:49 -0400 From: Keith Stevenson <k.stevenson@louisville.edu> To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Inetd and wrapping. Message-ID: <19990625111049.A8447@homer.louisville.edu> In-Reply-To: <14531.930319505@axl.noc.iafrica.com>; from Sheldon Hearn on Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 04:05:05PM %2B0200 References: <19990625093126.D23508@homer.louisville.edu> <14531.930319505@axl.noc.iafrica.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 04:05:05PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:31:26 -0400, Keith Stevenson wrote: > > > What is possible now that wasn't possible with tcpd from the ports > > collection? Why incorporate libwrap (and make our inetd functionally > > different from everyone else's) instead of bringing tcpd into the base > > system? > > If we _don't_ use tcpd, we save an exec on every call to every wrapped > service. Ok, I can see that as a win, especially for very busy servers. (I'm thinking ISPs here.) > > I know we're all worried about creeping featurisms, but think about > what we'll end up with here. We'll end up with an inetd that does _not_ > wrap by default (discussed with jkh in private mail). So people wanting > to carry on using tcpd stubbornly will be more than welcome to do so. > > We'll also end up with an inetd that _can_ wrap if it's told to (-w > and -ww). So we end up offering a better super-server than we had > before, with no backward compatibility problems, and no additional > incompatibilities with other systems (I can't find an inetd that uses > the -w flag for anything). Good. I was worried that we would have to add a flag to turn wrapping off. This makes the change much more palatable. > > The additional option in inetd.conf is not something I want. However, > it's something someone has made a legitimate public argument for, to > which I can't come up with a decent rebuttal. As long as this new option can safely be omitted by those of us who prefer a more "traditional" approach, I can't argue about it too much either. The purist in me doesn't like it, but I can't come up with a rebuttal either. > > Ciaol, > Sheldon (who is quickly learning that you can't please 'em all at all) Only a fool\h\h\h\h optimist tries to... :) Regards, --Keith Stevenson-- -- Keith Stevenson System Programmer - Data Center Services - University of Louisville k.stevenson@louisville.edu PGP key fingerprint = 4B 29 A8 95 A8 82 EA A2 29 CE 68 DE FC EE B6 A0 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?19990625111049.A8447>