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