Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 May 1998 12:56:00 +0800
From:      Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
To:        Pierre Beyssac <pb@fasterix.freenix.org>
Cc:        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Coidan_Sm=F8rgrav?= <dag-erli@ifi.uio.no>, net@FreeBSD.ORG, core@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: INRIA IPv6 on FreeBSD 
Message-ID:  <199805140456.MAA11164@spinner.netplex.com.au>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 14 May 1998 00:51:35 %2B0200." <19980514005135.A6349@fasterix.frmug.fr.net> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pierre Beyssac wrote:
[..]
> =

> Regarding the crypto stuff, I believe someone in England has written
> patches to implement the missing stuff in the INRIA implementation,
> but haven't tried this yet. All I can say is that all the hooks are
> there already.

Just out of interest.. Are these hooks for "payload encapsulation" or
"encryption"?  Naming could matter..  PPP's CCP hooks can be used for
providing encryption.  However, if there were explicit encryption hooks,
there would be problems since crypto hooks apparently fall under the ITAR=

regulations while generic hooks do not.  Not that this seems to be a majo=
r =

problem in practice though, a large number of net tools seem to have =

#ifdefs etc for calling encryption stuff (eg: kerberos).

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>   Netplex Consulting



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?199805140456.MAA11164>