Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 17:04:13 +0900 From: Yoshinobu Inoue <shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> To: asmodai@wxs.nl Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, cvs-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Solicite review for KAME 3rd patch] Message-ID: <19991207170413J.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <19991206195341.B11220@daemon.ninth-circle.org> References: <19991204154807.G711@daemon.ninth-circle.org> <19991206210212K.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> <19991206195341.B11220@daemon.ninth-circle.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >Then, I intentionally commented them out by default, because
> >INET6 kernel config option is also not enabled by default.
>
> Well, a make world shouldn't be dying from lack of specifying INET6.
I confirmed that now make world won't stop even if INET6 is
not defined at user-land, after the updated patch.
> wonder how to best tackle this problem. I mean, we want IPv6 support to
> be there when we want it, and not there when we don't. Ideas of how to
> solve this small kludge are welcome.
I don't know any automatic way, but how about putting
CFLAGS= -DINET6 [and any other things needed]
into /etc/make.conf when someone want to use IPv6, before make
world?, and if there is any apps which overwrites CFLAGS, to
fix them?
> >Thanks, though I'm a little bit uncertain where is the best
> >place ipfilter related files should be put in.
>
> Please ask Guido van Rooij <guido@freebsd.org> about this.
I am uncertain about the file re-order rule in sys/conf/files.
Now they seems to be ordered alphabetically, but if ipfilter
related files are re-ordered alphabetically, they are
dispersed.
> >> The `faith' pseudo-device captures packets sent to it and forwards them
> >> to the IPv4/IPv6 translation daemon.
> >
> >Thanks, I use it.
>
> Only if what I said is what it really does of course. Looking through
> the sources I think my description matches or at least comes close.
> (Which is of course based on your description.)
I feel your description more natural, and matches what faith
does.
> >> Does faith replace loop? If so, what is against adding the IPv6
> >> functionality to loop?
> >
> >Its if_type IFT_FAITH is also important.
>
> Aha, so we have loop and faith, which both provide the same
> functionality. Is the functionality _EXACT_ the same and does it differ
> only in terms of IPv6 support or does it differ even more aside from
> that. That wasn't too clear to me.
I think they are exactly same other than their if_type and mtu
size.
Then, we might only need faithattach() function and let
it set,
ifp->if_ioctl = loioctl;
ifp->if_output = looutput;
Is that what you are thinking of?
> Aha, so the true difference is the reprocessing of previously matched
> packets?
Yes, exactly.
> Inoue-san, feel free to mail me when your new patches are done as I am
> very eager to help getting KAME intergrated as fast as possible without
> too many hick-ups.
>
> Kind regards,
Thanks.
I already sent my new patches announce, but I'll fix
if_faith.c and create another patch.
Yoshinobu Inoue
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven/Asmodai asmodai@[wxs.nl|bart.nl]
> Documentation nutter. *BSD: Technical excellence at its best...
> The BSD Programmer's Documentation Project <http://home.wxs.nl/~asmodai>;
> Atone me to my throes curtail...
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991207170413J.shin>