From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Nov 16 10:51:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EADC5152BD for ; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:51:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA29486 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:51:28 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id TAA51410 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:51:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from fasterix.frmug.org (s192.paris-90.cybercable.fr [212.198.90.192]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C9614C8E; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:51:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pb@fasterix.frmug.org) Received: (from pb@localhost) by fasterix.frmug.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/pb-19990315) id TAA47907; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:51:03 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <19991116195103.Q1243@fasterix.frmug.org> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:51:03 +0100 From: Pierre Beyssac To: Yoshinobu Inoue Cc: cvs-committers@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, sakane@kame.net Subject: Re: [Solicite review for KAME 2nd patch](netinet6 basic part addtion) References: <19991112115745B.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> <19991112152848.A90019@fasterix.frmug.org> <19991113012530.A62524@fasterix.frmug.org> <19991112152848.A90019@fasterix.frmug.org> <19991117032655J.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 0.92.8i In-Reply-To: <19991117032655J.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp>; from Yoshinobu Inoue on Wed, Nov 17, 1999 at 03:26:55AM +0900 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Nov 17, 1999 at 03:26:55AM +0900, Yoshinobu Inoue wrote: > About in_pcb first 16 bytes, I tried to re-order each members > in my new patch, but addr part is difficult because it is now > shared with IPv6 addr, and anyway, IPv6 addrs can not be put > into 16 bytes. > > Should I add new pointer members which point to actual addr > part and put them into first 16 bytes, or is it meaningless? I doubt that would be useful. It's probably better to leave that alone. For the rest of the "first 16 bytes" stuff, I think someone with better knowledge than I have of the specific networking structures optimizations for i386 should have a look. > He think updating current pfkey header as RFC2367 is > meaingless, and wish to update it based on some commonly > agreed new pfkey spec, and wish to just keep it as is for now. That's probably wise, as I hope at least Blowfish will be included in the next revision of the RFC since it's as popular as DES in most implementations... -- Pierre Beyssac pb@fasterix.frmug.org pb@fasterix.freenix.org BSD : il y a moins bien, mais c'est coté en bourse Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message