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>