-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David S. Miller wrote:
> IPSEC/NAT will be done very differently from Patrick's old patches, > and in fact these hacks which you are adding are side effects of > the flaws in the original approach made in the IPSEC/NAT patches. > > I really cannot consider any of your patches for inclusion, they > really are not appropriate. > Okay, no problem. Anyway, in the meantime while people are still using Patricks patches in production systems (and they do:) they can use my patches to prevent problems with bridge devices. Greetings, Ludo. PS. What is the current plan for the enhancement of the xfrm subsystem versus NAT? - -- Ludo Stellingwerff V&S B.V. The Netherlands ProTactive firewall solution. Tel: +31 172 416116 Fax: +31 172 416124 site: www.protactive.nl demo: http://www.protactive.nl:81/netview.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDCJQVOF3sCpZ+AJgRAvPGAJwOc8Dg0mQNtnzgp2b2EkwKln4lHACcCBpf BH7gcOdvNL5f06s81C5WIdo= =simZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
