Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2018 10:21:56 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> Cc: Yuri Pankov <yuripv@yuripv.net>, Mark Peek <mp@freebsd.org>, Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: workaround for VMware WS NAT bug triggered by OpenSSH 7.8p1 changes Message-ID: <865zvkpphn.fsf@next.des.no> In-Reply-To: <201812230904.wBN94uKM014173@slippy.cwsent.com> (Cy Schubert's message of "Sun, 23 Dec 2018 01:04:56 -0800") References: <201812230904.wBN94uKM014173@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> writes: > I know our code is full of workarounds and theirs probably too. The=20 > question is should we? IMO no. Unfortunately, the world is imperfect and does not care about your opinion. 90% of the hardware we run on deviates from the spec in some way or another and requires workarounds in the kernel. We even have a whole system of quirks for disks and USB devices. Libfetch contains workarounds for buggy HTTP servers. OpenSSH has hundreds of lines of code devoted to identifying the server and selecting workarounds to apply. Without those workarounds, FreeBSD would not be a viable piece of software. Wishing they weren't needed is a waste of time and energy. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?865zvkpphn.fsf>