Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2007 12:16:00 +0200 From: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> To: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org> Cc: gnn@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: A radical restructuring of IPsec... Message-ID: <20070407101600.GF11297@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <46171DB2.6070705@FreeBSD.org> References: <m21wix61iy.wl%gnn@neville-neil.com> <46171DB2.6070705@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Bruce, On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 05:27:30AM +0100, Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > I'm all for this in principle. I believe that the case for FAST_IPSEC > over KAME IPSEC is fairly clear for those of us who have read the USENIX > paper. Qualitatively speaking I can say FAST_IPSEC has been more > pleasant to work with when introducing the TCP-MD5 support. Would you point out the paper you're talking about please ? George, Thank you for your work! I'm a little sorrowful to see KAME's work going to be forgotten, but well, this is Darwin's law :-). BTW, a couple of years ago, I've tried KAME's snapshot against my RELENG_4's tree. There was a number of features that weren't in the base system and I'm pretty sure this is still the case. I can't remember them all but one: NAT-PT (RFC2766) (IPv4<->IPv6 translation). Do you have any idea what those features will become in later days ? Thank you. Best regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070407101600.GF11297>