Subject: Re: allowing unpriv users to bind to priv ports
To: Joe Reed <>
From: Lubomir Sedlacik <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 09/26/2002 02:57:43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 08:49:49PM -0400, Joe Reed wrote:
> also, what if we wish to add a new protocol?  currently it's just
> adding a flag or 2 and adding the corresponding entries into the
> switch statements.  do we really want to add this much to /dev/ ??  i
> think the implementation may be to simpler to use a rule-based
> approach instead of  /dev/ports/*.

after thinking about it a bit more, it doesn't look that good anymore.
if nothing else 262145 taken inodes is a.. drawback :).  luke's idea
seems more usable and simple in one.


-- Lubomir Sedlacik <>   ASCII Ribbon campaign against  /"\=
--                  <>   e-mail in gratuitous HTML and  \ /=
--                                       Microsoft proprietary formats   X =
-- PGPkey:                                  / \=
-- Key Fingerprint: 75B2 2B96 CD75 0385 1C49  39B8 8B08 C30E 54BC 7263     =

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (NetBSD)