A radical restructuring of IPsec...

[Sam Leffler]

Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi, Bruce,
> 
> On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 05:27:30AM +0100, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
>> I'm all for this in principle. I believe that the case for FAST_IPSEC 
>> over KAME IPSEC is fairly clear for those of us who have read the USENIX 
>> paper. Qualitatively speaking I can say FAST_IPSEC has been more 
>> pleasant to work with when introducing the TCP-MD5 support.
> 
> Would you point out the paper you're talking about please ?

He's probably talking about my old Usenix BSDCon paper about fast ipsec.
 Look at the Usenix web site.

> 
> 
> 
> George,
> 
> Thank you for your work!
> 
> I'm a little sorrowful to see KAME's work going to be forgotten, but
> well, this is Darwin's law :-).
> 
> BTW, a couple of years ago, I've tried KAME's snapshot against my
> RELENG_4's tree.  There was a number of features that weren't in the
> base system and I'm pretty sure this is still the case.  I can't
> remember them all but one: NAT-PT (RFC2766) (IPv4<->IPv6 translation).
> Do you have any idea what those features will become in later days ?

It's easier to add features when there's a single code base to add them
too.  Some stuff exists in netbsd's fast ipsec code base and can be
brought over with minimal effort.

	Sam