From owner-freebsd-net Tue May 12 07:48:59 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA13989 for freebsd-net-outgoing; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:48:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA13721; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:47:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA00352; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:46:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from 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 In-reply-to: Your message of "12 May 1998 16:19:28 +0200." Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:46:20 -0700 Message-ID: <348.894984380@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Hmm... both? shouldn't really be too difficult as long as you don't > try to compile a kernel with both of them together. Well, is there any possibility that someone from INRIA could "get together" with someone from the WIDE project in the near future to discuss commonalities of implementation? As Garrett said, things which are pertinent to _both_ implementations would certainly be more than welcome at this time. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message