Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:41:27 -0400 From: "Scott Ullrich" <sullrich@gmail.com> To: "Max Laier" <max@love2party.net> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org, Andrew Thompson <thompsa@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: enc0 patch for ipsec Message-ID: <d5992baf0606160841u39594c81y870a894b56d1e30c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200606161735.33801.max@love2party.net> References: <20060615225312.GB64552@heff.fud.org.nz> <200606161735.33801.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/16/06, Max Laier <max@love2party.net> wrote: > I think it should get a "device enc" on its own. Some people might consider > enc(4) to be a security problem so getting it with FAST_IPSEC automatically > isn't preferable. You have to specifically create the enc0 interface (ifconfig enc0 create) before it becomes active. Otherwise it will not hit the enc code path unless the device is created. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d5992baf0606160841u39594c81y870a894b56d1e30c>