From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 27 14:03:37 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 E6A8416A421; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:03:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mrout1.yahoo.com (mrout1.yahoo.com [216.145.54.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BFAC13C44B; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:03:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (proxy8.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.48.13]) by mrout1.yahoo.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/y.out) with ESMTP id l5RDr7s4071123; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 06:53:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 22:52:56 +0900 Message-ID: From: "George V. Neville-Neil" To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: <20070627104126.G98813@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <24957.1182931589@critter.freebsd.dk> <20070627104126.G98813@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> 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: Poul-Henning Kamp , FreeBSD current mailing list , FreeBSD net mailing list Subject: Re: FAST_IPSEC import to HEAD is imminent.. 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: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:03:38 -0000 At Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:48:56 +0000 (UTC), Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > Hi, > > > Can we please drop the FAST_ prefix along with the old IPSEC when we > > get to that point ? > > yes, I think that is gnn's plan. I was a bit worried because it'll be > confusing that IPSEC->gone and FAST_IPSEC->IPSEC but hey IPSEC is gone;-) > As Bjoern said, that is the plan. After all is said and done we'll just have an IPSEC option with completely different code backing it. Best, George