From owner-freebsd-current Fri Oct 30 07:20:55 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20690 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:20:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from fledge.watson.org (COPLAND.CODA.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.222.48]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA20684 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:20:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA12632; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:19:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:19:54 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Garrett Wollman cc: John Hay , obrien@NUXI.com, tseidmann@simultan.ch, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPv6 in -current In-Reply-To: <199810291537.KAA00450@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > we can get a version of IPv6 standard in FreeBSD. I have been looking at > > (and using) the KAME stuff the last few weeks and am quite impressed > > with it. One of the advantages (for me) about the KAME stack is that we > > also get their IPSEC stuff, while with INRIA being in France, it makes > > things a little more complicated. > > Don't forget there's also the group of people who worked on the NRL > stack.... > > The other question that people have to consider whenever IPv6 comes > up: with whom are you going to communicate? Right now, there is no > globally-routed IPv6 infrastructure, and there is unlikely to be any, > any time soon (IOS 12, anyone?). I am prefectly happy with the state > of the world where we can advance our technological goals in the > context of IPv4, and let other parties provide an IPv6 implementation. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who use FreeBSD for network research and development (well, certainly at CMU, and I assume other places). As time goes by, will we start to lose some of these researchers because we don't offer the next generation of network support? I admit that I was extremely impressed when I looked at the BSD/OS 4.0 release notes and saw so many of the features I would look for in a network operating system/server platform (good SMP, IPsec, IPv6, and many many other new features). I would guess that relatively few people actually use a number of these features, but it is nice to know they are available. On the other hand, it is useful to note that a number of groups have been developing IPv6 and IPsec on FreeBSD, and we don't want to leave them high and dry, as it were. One of the issues that I've raised in the Coda group previously is adaptability of the current Coda software for use in new network environments, including IPv6 and IPsec. I don't have the time to integrate IPsec and IPv6 into an operating system, but I would benefit from an operating system where they were already present. :) Robert N Watson Carnegie Mellon University http://www.cmu.edu/ TIS Labs at Network Associates, Inc. http://www.tis.com/ SafePort Network Services http://www.safeport.com/ robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message