Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:02:32 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org> To: eri@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] stf(4) 6rd implementation Message-ID: <20130612.170232.1609178509417950961.hrs@allbsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG3rn-wEH-ckA-QXF%2B-3LyJM9s6NzrSkz5CxNG5LZTyWjw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPBZQG3rn-wEH-ckA-QXF%2B-3LyJM9s6NzrSkz5CxNG5LZTyWjw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jun_12_17_02_32_2013_963)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ermal Lu=E7i <eri@freebsd.org> wrote in <CAPBZQG3rn-wEH-ckA-QXF+-3LyJM9s6NzrSkz5CxNG5LZTyWjw@mail.gmail.co= m>: er> Hello, er> = er> at location [1] can be found a patch for making stf(4) understand 6= rd. er> It supports variable masks for the ipv4 network as well. er> = er> The patch has been tested on pfSense. er> It adds to new option to ifconfig for defining the 6rd border route= r at ISP. er> = er> ifconfig $stf stfv4net $ipv4network/$mask er> ifconfig $stf stfv4br $6rdv4gwip er> = er> = er> Any reasons for not pushing this change into FreeBSD? I am feeling guilty about not committing the original patch and RFC 5969 part for a long time. I still have uncommitted code for them (similar but some reported security and performance issues and corner cases addressed), I hope if you do not mind my working on it. I will finish it this month. -- Hiroki ----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jun_12_17_02_32_2013_963)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAlG4KxgACgkQTyzT2CeTzy0MiACdHI6/YtIn5ab7S6XtbpNnxHvn bc0An3wZoH6tGrNEcWrtvtgJFLwcRG/8 =/4no -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jun_12_17_02_32_2013_963)----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130612.170232.1609178509417950961.hrs>