From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 15 22:02:13 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4DA16A4B3; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:02:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pjd@garage.freebsd.pl) Received: from mail.garage.freebsd.pl (arm132.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [83.17.198.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DCA43DF7; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:00:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pjd@garage.freebsd.pl) Received: by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 697C951A3A; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:00:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (dkj188.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.24.13.188]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA234516FE; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:59:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:59:15 +0100 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20060315215915.GB16188@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20060315004530.B5861@fledge.watson.org> <20060314.204252.74651890.imp@bsdimp.com> <20060315105031.E5861@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060315105031.E5861@fledge.watson.org> X-PGP-Key-URL: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/pjd.asc X-OS: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT i386 User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r535 (FreeBSD) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on mail.garage.freebsd.pl X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL autolearn=no version=3.0.4 Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: netatm: plan for removal unless an active maintainer is found X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:02:13 -0000 --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:54:40AM +0000, Robert Watson wrote: +> Otherwise, with the exception of KAME IPSEC, the network stack code is a= ctually in pretty good shape for removing the Giant compat shims. We've ha= d at least a couple of=20 +> people say they're willing to work on this and take steps in the right d= irection (including some initial patches for IPSEC improvement), but I gues= s we'll see come August=20 +> whether it has happened. The discussion has always been about whether i= t's better to add IPv6 support to FAST_IPSEC, or lock down KAME IPSEC. Bot= h are desirable, and both=20 +> require significant familiarity with the code and protocols involved. Let me add my two cents. There are actually two things to do with KAME IPsec: MPSAFE and crypto(9) support and only one thing (IPv6) in case of fast_ipsec(4), so I think it will be much easier to add IPv6 support to fast_ipsec(4) and just drop KAME IPsec, so we can have one, full functional IPsec stack. This is really confusing for the users. When I first heard of fast_ipsec(4) I thought it only works with crypto HW and if I need to do cryptography in software I need KAME IPsec. But that's just an opinion of a passive observer:) --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEGI4yForvXbEpPzQRAuNJAKCJp1AqWN4F9QsSPY3rkNwFwMA5LQCfRNx3 T9TlhIZqePaUpBJsOgzfJ68= =L8YU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1--