Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:57:00 +0900 From: Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh <itojun@itojun.org> To: net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: v6 issues Message-ID: <12901.895046220@coconut.itojun.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sorry that I was dead silent on this issue. I believed that I was subscribed to net@freebsd.org, but the subscription request email was lost somewhere in the cyberspace... I'm one of core programmer at WIDE IPv6 project. I'll try to answer many emails at once... jordan>> The problem is that the INRIA IPv6 stack (which, according to our IPv6 jordan>> experts, is the best one available) only runs on FreeBSD 2.2.5R, and I jordan>> really, really want to run 3.0-CURRENT (or at the very least jordan>> 2.2.6-STABLE) on it. So I have three choices (in descending order of jordan>> workload): jordan> I believe that the WIDE stuff already runs under -current. Current situation for WIDE IPv6 stack: Our primary release is for 2.2.6-RELEASE because it is too hard to keep track of 3.0-current, without merging our IPv6 stack into the repository in freefall. (two moving target in one repository is a hard one) Now I'm working on WIDE IPv6 stack on 3.0-SNAP980311, I'm doing my best to release this soon. And then there will be 3.0-current port. jordan> > Hmm... both? shouldn't really be too difficult as long as you don't jordan> > try to compile a kernel with both of them together. jordan> Well, is there any possibility that someone from INRIA could "get jordan> together" with someone from the WIDE project in the near future to jordan> discuss commonalities of implementation? As Garrett said, things jordan> which are pertinent to _both_ implementations would certainly be more jordan> than welcome at this time. Contact me anytime, I was looked at INRIA stack in the past but I thought that there were many things to be cleaned up. I should look into the recent snapshot to provide comparison report for two implementation. (of course it is better if somebody in neutral position can provide a comparison, maybe my eye is biased...) jordan> Erm, unfortunately, the WIDE project in Japan recently approached us jordan> (well, Mike, myself and DG at any rate) with essentially the exact jordan> same proposal and now we're seriously stuck trying to figure out what jordan> to do. Obviously there can't be TWO IPv6 implementations in -current, jordan> so which to choose? :-( After talking to Mike, he noted that we should say more about what we (WIDE IPv6 efforts) are aimed. I wrote up (draft) project overview for you. Any questions are welcome. WIDE IPv6 stack is now called KAME project, and it is full-time project for core workers. We can commit to maintain sys/netinet6 part if our stack is get merged into 3.0-current. http://www.kame.net/project-overview.html itojun@itojun.org itojun@kame.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?12901.895046220>