From owner-freebsd-net  Wed Apr  3 10:40:16 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from rwcrmhc54.attbi.com (rwcrmhc54.attbi.com [216.148.227.87])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D828537B417
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed,  3 Apr 2002 10:40:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8])
          by rwcrmhc54.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020403184012.PYMO15826.rwcrmhc54.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>;
          Wed, 3 Apr 2002 18:40:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA26573;
	Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:37:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:37:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kame ipsec vs. openbsd ipsec
In-Reply-To: <2c1d01c1db3b$460c7720$52557f42@errno.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0204031036550.26496-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-net.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-net>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-net>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

have you asked the KAME people if they have plans to 
do such suppport themselves?


On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Sam Leffler wrote:

> I'm slogging through the KAME IPsec code looking at adding support for
> crypto hardware (and NICs that do onboard IPSEC processing).  The OpenBSD
> IPsec implementation already has this and doing something similar to what
> OpenBSD has done requires restructuring large parts of the KAME code in a
> similar way.  (It's also likely to have repercussions throughout the rest of
> the inet code.) So it seems I can either muck with the KAME code or
> integrate the OpenBSD code instead. Both options are a lot of work so I
> thought I'd solicit some feedback first.
> 
> 1. Has anyone else seriously looked at doing this?
> 2. Has anyone compared the OpenBSD and KAME implementations and understand
> their relative strengths? (e.g. is there some reason to work with KAME other
> than it's already in the system)
> 
> I found an old port of the OpenBSD code to FreeBSD but that was abandoned.
> 
>     Sam
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
> 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message