Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:04:47 +0900 From: gnn@neville-neil.com To: David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Subject: Re: IPSec on current. Message-ID: <m28y9rtueo.wl@minion.local.neville-neil.com> In-Reply-To: <16768.22876.926445.412412@canoe.dclg.ca> References: <16767.52282.937187.190919@canoe.dclg.ca> <6.1.2.0.0.20041027124606.09c40768@64.7.153.2> <16767.53956.366966.737912@canoe.dclg.ca> <6.1.2.0.0.20041027131824.10140c90@64.7.153.2> <m2fz3ztwct.wl@minion.local.neville-neil.com> <16768.22876.926445.412412@canoe.dclg.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:28:44 -0400, David Gilbert wrote: > > >>>>> "George" == George V Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com> writes: > > George> At Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:19:33 -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> At 12:54 PM 27/10/2004, David Gilbert wrote: > >> > >> >So ... are you saying that FAST_IPSEC excludes INET6? > >> > >> As far as I know, yes. It needs to be disabled. In the BUGS section > >> of the man page, "There is presently no support for IPv6." > >> > >> Perhaps sam@freebsd.org can confirm. > > George> Just for the record, yes, FAST_IPSEC does not support INET6. > > It's also possible that the division panic and the GPF panic were with > and without INET6. I not on the machine at the momment. > > Not supporting IPv6 is less of a showstopper than not supporting > FAST_IPSEC as the later is required (for isntance) BGP. Yes, I was just clearing up the point. As to the actual panic, I may have time to look at it but I'm hoping others will chime in. Thanks, George
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m28y9rtueo.wl>