On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 04:01:39PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote: > > I have some questions/comments: > > 1) do we really need linux/include/rtnetlink.h? Shouldn't this > be coming from the kernel headers? Yes. You can't include Linux kernel headers directly in a user-space application as they're not guaranteed to compile in user-space. > 2) You appear to have conditionalized the scripts to live > on both kernels. That's very cool, but does it make any > sense to do given that pluto would seem to do one or > the other? What I'd like to see is a single freeswan binary package that will work whichever kernel you happen to be running, or even whichever kernel modules you happen to have loaded. The native IPsec stack has already been backported to 2.4. > 3) I'd like to accept your patches into our tree. I would prefer > that the pluto patches be at least, #ifdef'ed. > Better would be if we created: > kernel-klips.c > kernel-netlink.c > > and included one or other into compilation. Sure, I'll try to separate out the netlink stuff. But I'd prefer for the decision of using klips/linux to be made at run-time. BTW, the Linux side is not completely netlink-dependent since I'm only using it for the purpose of setting priority of policies. For the other operations it's still using pfkey. -- Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ ) Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
