> [ discussions about inetd ] I wasn't trying to suggest any particular implementation strategy. I was assuming that it would be handled at the SMF level, that SMF just wouldn't start rpcbind if there weren't any consumers for it.
Think of it as "lazy" service start. It would be enabled, but marked so that merely being enabled didn't cause it to be started. It wouldn't be started until some other service that declared a dependency on it was started. I used telnetd as an example of a service where "enable" and "start" were less tightly tied together; I didn't mean to drag inetd into the discussion. An inetd-style "start when actually requested" scheme would be good in some ways - it would work for non-SMF components that need the service - but would be bad in others, since it would offer an attack vector even when no enabled service depends on it.
