Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:10:26 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Glen Gross <ggross@symark.com> Cc: "'Sheldon Hearn'" <sheldonh@starjuice.net>, Brad Huntting <huntting@glarp.com>, Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org>, "kris@obsecurity.org" <kris@obsecurity.org>, "freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: !RE: IPSEC/IPSEC_ESP module(s) Message-ID: <20010803191026.A12509@citusc17.usc.edu> In-Reply-To: <01C11C0F.5FFB33B0.ggross@symark.com>; from ggross@symark.com on Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:28:09AM -0700 References: <01C11C0F.5FFB33B0.ggross@symark.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:28:09AM -0700, Glen Gross wrote: > This gives me the opportunity to ask a question I have been wondering for a > while... I've been building kernels with IPSEC support > and was unclear what kind of load this puts on the system by default. If IPSEC > has hooks into all the networking code, does this > become an issue on slow or otherwise heavily loaded hardware? Currently I am I wouldn't expect it to be a significant issue. > The reason this comes up for me is that someone from SSH Communications > recently told me that "IPSEC supports IPv6." Does this mean > that if I enable IPSEC in the kernel, I should also make sure to enable the > IPv6 code? I would deeply appreciate it > if someone could shed some light on this subject for me. IPSEC supports IPv4 as well :-) The comment just means that it works with both. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7a1mSWry0BWjoQKURAhfBAKCm2vgnbsMyWqn/NKpXpmnwsTGiogCfdd+f PpON2ToVfXuB9bxwEYugcgc= =BW8S -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010803191026.A12509>