Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 13:24:44 +0900 From: Yoshinobu Inoue (=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCMGY+ZU5JPy4bKEI=?=) <shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPv6 - when? which? Message-ID: <19981227132444B.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 26 Dec 1998 17:05:09 %2B0100" <19981226170509.A20826@keltia.freenix.fr> References: <19981226170509.A20826@keltia.freenix.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Not to beat around dead horse - but what was the final > > outcome of the "which IPv6 vendor" thread a few weeks > > back? Will 3.1-CURRENT get an IPsec and IPv6? To be > > very honest - I am more interested in IPsec then v6. > Then take it either from OpenBSD or from the KAME folks. I think it would > be unwise to choose one implementation over the other considereing they'll > be merged in a few months. KAME for 3.0 is almost ready. (IPsec and IPv6 is working. Some user-land work is left.) And I can make KAME for current as the next step, if it is necessary. Because unified-ipv6 issue happened when I began TCP v4/v6 merging, I tried to make TCP part alike INRIA code, as much as possible. However this is not from formal unified-ipv6 source tree. It is being prepared separately. If IPsec and IPv6 is needed for FreeBSD current so urgently, KAME will soon be available. (But some major change will happen in the future, as it is unified with other IPv6 protocol stacks) Or if people think more unified version should be incorporated at first, it will also be ready in few months. Yoshinobu Inoue shin@kame.net 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?19981227132444B.shin>