Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!oddjob!uwvax!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!hoptoad!gnu From: gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: IP options implementation Message-ID: <2364@hoptoad.uucp> Date: Sat, 4-Jul-87 23:31:13 EDT Article-I.D.: hoptoad.2364 Posted: Sat Jul 4 23:31:13 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 5-Jul-87 05:36:27 EDT References: <8706301311.AA01944@gswd-vms.Gould.COM> Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco Lines: 13 tucker%mycroft@gswd-vms.Gould.COM (Tim Tucker) wrote: > Why didn't Berkeley implement the security option? Those of us selling systems > to the DOD need to add it anyway and it would probably be nice if a common > implementation across all users of 4.3BSD TCP existed. I have an idea -- why doesn't Gould implement it, and post the changes to the net, or send them to Berkeley? You seem to be the first to need it, and making it available for free, like Berkeley did with the whole protocol implementation, makes it likely that "a common implementation across all users" will exist. -- {dasys1,ncoast,well,sun,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@ingres.berkeley.edu Alt.all: the alternative radio of the Usenet. Contributions welcome - post 'em