From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 6 14:06:39 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C43216A404 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 14:06:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mrout3.yahoo.com (mrout3.yahoo.com [216.145.54.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D71913C489 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 14:06:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (proxy8.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.48.13]) by mrout3.yahoo.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/y.out) with ESMTP id l36E6GX0035449 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 07:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 23:05:57 +0900 Message-ID: From: gnn@freebsd.org To: net@freebsd.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Shij=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.0.95 (i386-apple-darwin8.8.2) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Subject: A radical restructuring of IPsec... X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:06:39 -0000 Hi, There is now a patch here: http://people.freebsd.org/~gnn/fast_ipv6.20070406.diff which follows the current state of my radical_ipsec p4 branch. The patch removes Kame derived IPsec from the tree, and adds v6 support to FAST_IPSEC. The IPSEC kernel option is removed, but the FAST_IPSEC option remains. This is a test patch and has a known problem with routing packets through a node. Nodes can operate in a host mode, that is they are the endpoint of a tunnel. When I applied the patch to a CURRENT tree (6 April 2007, 23:00 JST) it applied but did not automatically create the netinet6/ip6_ipsec.c and netinet6/ip6_sec.h file. I'm not sure why not. If those files are not created then you can create them by hand from the patch file. This is the direction that IPsec will be going in future so it would be good for people to start at least looking at these changes. Best, George