From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Dec 3 18:04:39 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA03640 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 3 Dec 1998 18:04:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from coconut.itojun.org (coconut.itojun.org [210.160.95.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA03627 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 1998 18:04:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from itojun@itojun.org) Received: from kiwi.itojun.org (itojun@localhost.itojun.org [127.0.0.1]) by coconut.itojun.org (8.9.1+3.1W/3.7W/smtpfeed 0.89) with ESMTP id LAA27372; Fri, 4 Dec 1998 11:04:12 +0900 (JST) To: Andreas Klemm cc: Guido van Rooij , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Eivind Eklund , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: shin@kame.net In-reply-to: andreas's message of Thu, 03 Dec 1998 20:16:08 +0100. <19981203201608.A14870@klemm.gtn.com> X-Template-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.org X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@itojun.org X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD 90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2 Subject: Re: Can we just come to a decision on IPv6 and IPSec? From: Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 11:04:11 +0900 Message-ID: <27368.912737051@coconut.itojun.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >It's only available for 2.2.7, and therefor Jordan pointed out, >that this is a real disadvantage for 3.0, which is the future... We are doing KAME on 3.0. Shin (cc'ed) has more to say about this. Basically, the last item left is TCP integration to IPv6. There has been big changes in netinet tree between 2.2.x to 3.0 so we have to modify from scratch. >But from the Webserver: >We have chosen 2.2.x-RELEASE because: >- it is excellent for daily use. >- well-maintained "ports" tree helps us modify applications to support IPv6. >- and 3.0-current is too hard to track if we maintain cvs repository > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > separately. > ^^^^^^^^^^ >What does that mean ? And if not ?? If they would / could commit their >developement to the -current tree and merge stable stuff to RELENG_2_2 ?! The above means: - we can't keep track of all 3.0-current changes during our developement. we have separate repository for all of our work. it is too much work to do and we need a something like RELEASE snapshot. - there has been no RELEASE in 3.0 for us to start with. Now we have 3.0-RELEASE and we are doing KAME on 3.0-RELEASE. When the merge to FreeBSD repository happens, we may have to maintain two repositories (at FreeBSD and at KAME). To decrease repository maintainance cost, we may have to do either of the following: - all KAME guys must become committer, use FreeBSD repository for all KAME/FreeBSD 3.0 developments - KAME guys should copy changes back and forth every day - KAME guys will import and merge in new KAME into 3.0 repository, every time KAME makes a new bi-monthly snapshot. Important fixes/changes are synced right away. There are too many volatile things in IPv6 and IPsec, and I think the last item is the most workable solution. itojun To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message