From owner-freebsd-net Tue May 12 12:55:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA12438 for freebsd-net-outgoing; Tue, 12 May 1998 12:55:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA12164; Tue, 12 May 1998 12:53:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dag-erli@ifi.uio.no) Received: from hrotti.ifi.uio.no (2602@hrotti.ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.15]) by ifi.uio.no (8.8.8/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with ESMTP id VAA25125; Tue, 12 May 1998 21:53:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from dag-erli@localhost) by hrotti.ifi.uio.no ; Tue, 12 May 1998 21:53:04 +0200 (MET DST) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Guido van Rooij , peter@netplex.com.au (Peter Wemm), pete@sms.fi, net@FreeBSD.ORG, core@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: INRIA IPv6 on FreeBSD References: <2990.894997902@time.cdrom.com> Organization: University of Oslo, Department of Informatics X-url: http://www.stud.ifi.uio.no/~dag-erli/ X-Stop-Spam: http://www.cauce.org From: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Date: 12 May 1998 21:53:03 +0200 In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard"'s message of "Tue, 12 May 1998 11:31:42 -0700" Message-ID: Lines: 21 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes: > I appreciate that people's time is limited, especially for > bleeding-edge issues like IPv6, but perhaps a working group could be > formed at this point to go actually study the various options far more > substantially before we move on to the stage of talking seriously > about committing anything? That is indeed a good idea. I have myself little experience with IPv6 - though I plan to get some fast :) - but my general impression is that the INRIA stack is, for the time being, better than the WIDE stack, but that the WIDE stack is catching up. Also, the packaging of the WIDE stack is such that integrating it into FreeBSD would be far less work than integrating the INRIA stack (amongst other things, it is much better documented, and is distributed as a set of patches rather than a collection of replacement files). Then again, the INRIA stack is being developed in France, so naturally I am slightly partial to it ;) -- Noone else has a .sig like this one. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message