Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:11:14 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG, core@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: INRIA IPv6 on FreeBSD Message-ID: <155.894982274@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "12 May 1998 14:36:49 %2B0200." <xzpk97r64ym.fsf@yggdrasil.ifi.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The problem is that the INRIA IPv6 stack (which, according to our IPv6 > experts, is the best one available) only runs on FreeBSD 2.2.5R, and I > really, really want to run 3.0-CURRENT (or at the very least > 2.2.6-STABLE) on it. So I have three choices (in descending order of > workload): I believe that the WIDE stuff already runs under -current. > Naturally, I would prefer the first alternative. It is MHO (and I have > voiced it before) that FreeBSD should jump on board the IPv6 train as > soon as possible. I have just sent an e-mail to Francis Dupont (author > of the INRIA IPv6 stack) expressing more or less what I am writing > here. > > So how do you feel about integrating the INRIA IPv6 stack into FreeBSD > CURRENT? Erm, unfortunately, the WIDE project in Japan recently approached us (well, Mike, myself and DG at any rate) with essentially the exact same proposal and now we're seriously stuck trying to figure out what to do. Obviously there can't be TWO IPv6 implementations in -current, so which to choose? :-( - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?155.894982274>