On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 3:12 AM, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
> Actually, not, because there are no bits left in inp_flags, so we are
> actually looking for another location to put them.
Sounds good and thanks for the information. We will be happy to test
the next patch when it's ready.
Thanks for
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 04:24:44PM -0400, Scott Ullrich wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:11 AM, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:41:41PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> [snip]
> >> We have about 3 months left to get that patch in for 8; ideally 6
> >> weeks. Can you update
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:11 AM, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:41:41PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
[snip]
>> We have about 3 months left to get that patch in for 8; ideally 6
>> weeks. Can you update the nat-t patch in a way as discussed here
>> before so that the extra a
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:41:41PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
[...]
> I am not going to find my posting from a few years back but the
> solution is to keep the kernel and libipsec (and setkey) in base in
> sync and not install libipsec and setkey from the ipsec-tools port.
> Done.
There are two
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
Hi,
If someone has a magic solution without drawbacks, please tell us !
I am not going to find my posting from a few years back but the
solution is to keep the kernel and libipsec (and setkey) in base in
sync and not install libipsec and setkey fro
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:48:06PM +0200, Riaan Kruger wrote:
> I see a lot of good work done on the nat-t patches for FreeBSD and
> ipsec-tools.
That's what we're trying to do, even if we know that there is still
some work to do !
> I was wondering if the base setkey is due for an update?
> If
