Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 00:26:29 +0100 From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Can we just come to a decision on IPv6 and IPSec? Message-ID: <19981203002629.A26879@klemm.gtn.com> In-Reply-To: <8701.912631921@zippy.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 12:52:01PM -0800 References: <19981202172824.A23747@klemm.gtn.com> <8701.912631921@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 12:52:01PM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > The offer -STABLE source and -CURRENT Snaps. > > Things they are working on is: > > > > - IPv6 > > - IPsec > > - advanced packet queuing, ATM, mobility,.... > > One has to ask the obvious question, however: The existing IPSec stuff > that's been submitted for commit approval is fully functional and > currently in use at several sites in Europe. If we went to the KAME > stuff right now, today, would we be able to offer these users the same > degree of functionality or would KAME represent a "loss" from their > perspective? Could the people you mention evaluate KAME on a 2.2.7 system ? Or could perhaps a dialogue between those people and KAME developers help to do the right decision ? I personally don't know people using IPsec... Andreas /// -- Andreas Klemm http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~andreas What gives you 90% more speed, for example, in kernel compilation ? http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~fsmp/SMP/akgraph-a/graph1.html "NT = Not Today" (Maggie Biggs) ``powered by FreeBSD SMP'' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981203002629.A26879>