Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 17:52:15 +0900 From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> To: "Wilkinson, Alex" <alex.wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Initial review request for IPv6 Fast Forwarding and IP6STEALTH Message-ID: <y7vllc7hn0g.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> In-Reply-To: <20041206114646.GD999@squash.dsto.defence.gov.au> References: <20041115222310.GA93130@scylla.towardex.com> <41B1EB4E.78490459@freebsd.org> <20041206114646.GD999@squash.dsto.defence.gov.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:16:46 +1030, >>>>> "Wilkinson, Alex" <alex.wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au> said: >> Nice, needs some cleanup though. Once you have cleaned it up you can run >> it either through me or gnn@. He is more of a IPv6 fan than I am (in my >> book IPv6 is broken by design^TM). > Why ? (Perhaps this is slightly an off-topic for this list, but) I'm also interested in the reason, but it's not surprising that someone in the world has a negative impression on a big feature like IPv6 or IPsec, since such a thing has typically both pros and cons. And whatever the reason is, the important thing I believe is to keep IPv6 implementation as good as IPv4 one on FreeBSD, in terms of both stability and functionality. I'm quite sure the fact that FreeBSD has provided a good IPv6 implementation has enlarged the user base of this particular operating system, comparing to, e.g., Linux. So, I hope core FreeBSD developers to care about the quality of IPv6 implementation as seriously as that of IPv4 implementation, regardless of their own position on IPv6 itself. As an IPv6-related person, I'm willing to help that process if I can do something in that area. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?y7vllc7hn0g.wl>