From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 28 12:00:13 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D481065677
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:00:13 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from vanhu@zeninc.net)
Received: from smtp.zeninc.net (smtp.zeninc.net [80.67.176.25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D7E8FC20
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:00:11 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from vanhu@zeninc.net)
Received: from astro.zen.inc (astro.zen.inc [192.168.1.239])
	by smtp.zeninc.net (smtpd) with ESMTP id 16DE92798BD;
	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:00:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by astro.zen.inc (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 5EBAE1705A; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:07:51 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:07:51 +0200
From: VANHULLEBUS Yvan <vanhu@FreeBSD.org>
To: Giulio Ferro <auryn@zirakzigil.org>
Message-ID: <20090428120751.GA68471@zeninc.net>
References: <49F6D598.6040503@zirakzigil.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49F6D598.6040503@zirakzigil.org>
User-Agent: All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less.
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: IPSEC NAT traversal
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:00:13 -0000

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:08:24PM +0200, Giulio Ferro wrote:
> What's the status of NATT patch in 8 current? Is it usable?

Hi.

See recent archives, there is actually an issue with the patchset, as
there are no more available bits in struct inp's flags.
We're working on that to find and implement the best solution.


Yvan.