From owner-freebsd-net Thu May 14 05:15:10 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA15932 for freebsd-net-outgoing; Thu, 14 May 1998 05:15:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from localhost.zilker.net (jump-k56flex-0093.jumpnet.com [207.8.6.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA15524; Thu, 14 May 1998 05:13:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marquard@zilker.net) Received: (from marquard@localhost) by localhost.zilker.net (8.8.8/8.8.3) id HAA13819; Thu, 14 May 1998 07:13:55 -0500 (CDT) To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Ollivier Robert , core@FreeBSD.ORG, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: INRIA IPv6 on FreeBSD References: <6876.895046243@time.cdrom.com> From: Dave Marquardt Date: 14 May 1998 07:13:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard"'s message of "Wed, 13 May 1998 00:57:23 -0700" Message-ID: <85pvhhhwxp.fsf@localhost.zilker.net> Lines: 18 X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.22/XEmacs 19.16 - "Lille" Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes: > > If I remember well, there are at least two WIDE implementations, one > > kernel-based and one using a user-mode daemon. I've not tried the WIDE ones > > but the INRIA code is heavily used in France where FreeBSD is one of the > > most used IPv6 platforms... > > > > FWIW IBM has chosen the INRIA as its IPv6 stack for AIX. > > Sigh.. If we're to get any further with this, we really really need > to get out of the realm of the political ("xxx is running our stack! > We're #1!" :-) and into the realm of the technical. WHY is it better > than the WIDE stuff? How and where? What are the _specific points of > comparison_ that we need to be aware of? Jordan, I agree. As I said, WIDE wasn't available at the time IBM chose INRIA, so we didn't do that comparison. -Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message