From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 24 12:58:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700D116A4CE for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E19743D4C for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [66.127.85.89] ([66.127.85.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i3OJw5WR040398 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 24 Apr 2004 12:58:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040424142123.07bf3db0@64.7.153.2> References: <44658B20-9610-11D8-AAEB-000A95AD0668@errno.com> <6.0.3.0.0.20040424142123.07bf3db0@64.7.153.2> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Sam Leffler Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 12:58:14 -0700 To: Mike Tancsa X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 04:47:53 -0700 cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: "Oldach, Helge" Subject: Re: FAST_IPSEC bug fix X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 19:58:09 -0000 On Apr 24, 2004, at 11:24 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > At 12:56 PM 24/04/2004, Sam Leffler wrote: >> On Apr 24, 2004, at 9:03 AM, Oldach, Helge wrote: >> >>> Hi list, >>> >>> this is a month-old mail about the lack of a FAST_IPSEC feature >>> compared >>> to legacy IPSEC. Including a working patch. I haven't seen this being >>> committed, or is it? Please also MFC to STABLE. >> >> The fix was not quite right for -current (where it needs to go in >> first). I sent out the attached patch for testing but received no >> feedback. Until I can get it tested and committed to -current it >> won't be MFC'd. > > We dont run -current here, so I dont have anything to test it on. > Also, due to the bugs in the driver with HiFn 7955, we have had to > abandon FAST_IPSEC :( Running FAST IPSEC w/o h/w crypto is still faster than KAME IPsec. See the results in my BSDCon paper. Sam