Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:59:10 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Support for the enc(4) pseudo-interface Message-ID: <20170321115910.GI64587@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <12FB978F-D222-4221-9DE9-40AFB435187C@lists.zabbadoz.net> References: <1490085811-bc1aa9c7b83aeddb9dee198bc4071b35@olivarim.com> <44FBCEF5-6151-46FF-A166-81E7306914CC@sigsegv.be> <58D11201.1000403@quip.cz> <20170321114636.GH64587@home.opsec.eu> <12FB978F-D222-4221-9DE9-40AFB435187C@lists.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! > >> Shouldn't it be included in GENERIC if IPSec is now part of it? > > Yes, please include enc in the GENERIC kernel. > I thought the entire idea of making ipsec loadable was that we don???t > have to ship it in the kernel and have it available? You are right. kldload if_enc seems to work on 12a and 11a. So ignore my plea for enc in GENERIC 8-} -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 3 years to go !
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170321115910.GI64587>