From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Dec 2 15:42:25 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21423 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:42:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA21417 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:42:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA09837; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:43:50 -0800 (PST) To: Andreas Klemm cc: Eivind Eklund , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Can we just come to a decision on IPv6 and IPSec? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 03 Dec 1998 00:26:29 +0100." <19981203002629.A26879@klemm.gtn.com> Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 15:43:50 -0800 Message-ID: <9834.912642230@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Could the people you mention evaluate KAME on a 2.2.7 system ? > Or could perhaps a dialogue between those people and KAME > developers help to do the right decision ? I personally don't > know people using IPsec... I'm not really interested in what it does on 2.2.7, to be perfectly honest. It's good that the old releases be supported, don't misunderstand me, but 3.0 is the future and if it's not running in -current then it's just not a candidate for merging to that branch, for the obvious reasons. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message