Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
Jean-Francois Dive wrote: I really thing it worth looking at the native linux implemetation in 2.5. I will upload openbsd isakmpd this week ported to linux. It does work on intel and i'll do some test on alpha and sun (well, i still cant install debian on my netra though). I bet the stack part'll be working on sparc64 as some of it have been written by David Miller. I decided to take a look at it today. I pulled down 2.5.59, but I'm still trying to get it to compile. Anyone know which 2.5 kernels compile on sparc64? -- Steve Dunham http://www.cse.msu.edu/~dunham
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:26:14PM -0500, Chad Miller wrote: Well, Mips can be either Big- or Little-Endian. I've heard rumor of a jumper on some motherboards to flip it. Of course, that sounds just too cool to be true. ARM can run either way too - and it doesnt even need a jumper :O) -- Paul
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 12:44:06PM -0800, Patrick Morris wrote: In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Nah many people use freeswan on sparc/alpha/PPC ... -- Paul Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 11:06:51AM +0100, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Has anyone of you successfully managed to use ipsec on a sparc64 machine? I've still never managed to get it working. I've basically given up on freeswan on SPARC64. Hopefully the ipsec implementation that's going in to Linux 2.6 will give better results. I don't remember the details of the freeswan problem, but it has something to do with the way ioctls are implemented on sparc64. There's some kind of translation or something that goes on in kernel space. But that's only what I can recall from my vague memories of hearing it explained; I've never actually looked at the code, and don't know my way around the kernel source well enough to know where to look. noah -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:35:03PM +0100, Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? The problem is specific to any arch where the userspace and kernel run different bitness. Like sparc64, where userland is 32bit (same for ppc64, mips64 and some other arch's atleast for a short time). Ioctl's from userspace have to be translated in this case from 32bit to 64bit. Those translations have to be done by someone, and no one has tried it yet. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
Paul Hedderly wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 12:44:06PM -0800, Patrick Morris wrote: In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Nah many people use freeswan on sparc/alpha/PPC ... I was unable to compile freeswan on Sun Ultra1 (sparc64) due use of two compilers. One for kernel (egcs64), other for userland. If a code is not written with this issue in mind (freeswan is not), then you will end with problems, when userland part of freeswan (compiled with gcc) will call code from kernel (which is compiled with egcs64). So maybe it is working on sparc32, but in my experience not on sparc64. advertising I'm using TINC now /advertising ;-) mARTin -- Paul Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 11:06:51AM +0100, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Has anyone of you successfully managed to use ipsec on a sparc64 machine? I've still never managed to get it working. I've basically given up on freeswan on SPARC64. Hopefully the ipsec implementation that's going in to Linux 2.6 will give better results. I don't remember the details of the freeswan problem, but it has something to do with the way ioctls are implemented on sparc64. There's some kind of translation or something that goes on in kernel space. But that's only what I can recall from my vague memories of hearing it explained; I've never actually looked at the code, and don't know my way around the kernel source well enough to know where to look. noah -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Martin Rusko PhD student Department of Automation and Measurement Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Slovak University of Technology -- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web:http://sunsite.mine.nu/~rusko -- motto: We are Microsoft! Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation.
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 02:31:02PM +0100, Martin Rusko wrote: Paul Hedderly wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 12:44:06PM -0800, Patrick Morris wrote: In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Nah many people use freeswan on sparc/alpha/PPC ... I was unable to compile freeswan on Sun Ultra1 (sparc64) due use of two Ahh.. So maybe it is working on sparc32, but in my experience not on sparc64. Yea I guess so... -- Paul
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 08:21:42AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:35:03PM +0100, Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? The problem is specific to any arch where the userspace and kernel run different bitness. Like sparc64, where userland is 32bit (same for ppc64, mips64 and some other arch's atleast for a short time). Ioctl's from userspace have to be translated in this case from 32bit to 64bit. Those translations have to be done by someone, and no one has tried it yet. Stupid question: Aren't 64-bit userland binaries supported by the sun4u kernels? If so, can't ipsec userland be compiled as a 64-bit app? Please enlighten me; I know I don't know all the details. -- Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Avoid gunfire in the bathroom tonight.
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 07:47:10AM +, Paul Hedderly wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 12:44:06PM -0800, Patrick Morris wrote: In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Nah many people use freeswan on sparc/alpha/PPC ... I thought that both Alpha and PPC were little endian... I know that I got freeswan to compile on my MIPS box, though I don't think I ever got it to actually work. But then again, I don't remember how hard I tried. noah -- ___ | Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/ | PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html pgpw0aPZsWmtt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 04:14:56PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 07:47:10AM +, Paul Hedderly wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 12:44:06PM -0800, Patrick Morris wrote: In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Nah many people use freeswan on sparc/alpha/PPC ... I thought that both Alpha and PPC were little endian... Nope, big. Intel is the odd duck. I know that I got freeswan to compile on my MIPS box, though I don't think I ever got it to actually work. But then again, I don't remember how hard I tried. Well, Mips can be either Big- or Little-Endian. I've heard rumor of a jumper on some motherboards to flip it. Of course, that sounds just too cool to be true. - chad
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
Ben Collins wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:35:03PM +0100, Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? The problem is specific to any arch where the userspace and kernel run different bitness. Like sparc64, where userland is 32bit (same for ppc64, mips64 and some other arch's atleast for a short time). Ioctl's from userspace have to be translated in this case from 32bit to 64bit. Those translations have to be done by someone, and no one has tried it yet. I actually did all of the changes about a year ago, but ran into other problems (I think DES was broken in some way, or the key wasn't making it in right). I didn't have time to debug it further, and I don't have the changes anymore. I may take a look again in the near future, because my firewall is sparc64 (the other option being to try to get 2.5 ipsec working on it), but I just moved, started a new job, and have way too much stress to work on it at the moment. Anyways, you have to write translators for the data structures passed in the ioctls. There are some examples in the kernel, it's not too tricky to do. Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
I really thing it worth looking at the native linux implemetation in 2.5. I will upload openbsd isakmpd this week ported to linux. It does work on intel and i'll do some test on alpha and sun (well, i still cant install debian on my netra though). I bet the stack part'll be working on sparc64 as some of it have been written by David Miller. JeF On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 19:32, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? I think it is only an sparc64 Problem. Since sparc64 uses a 64 bit Kernel and 32 bit Userland there has to be a translater 32/64 bit in ioctl calls (or so I understood). Since the IPSEC-Translater overlaps with other translaters (namely the one for PPP) there will be a problem if your kernel supports PPP and IPSEC (which mine does). In sparc32 you (obviously) need no such translator. HTH, Uli -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Jean-Francois Dive -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is no such thing as randomness. Only order of infinite complexity. - Marquis de LaPlace - deterministic Principles -
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
Ben Collins wrote: The problem is specific to any arch where the userspace and kernel run different bitness. Like sparc64, where userland is 32bit (same for ppc64, mips64 and some other arch's atleast for a short time). Ioctl's from userspace have to be translated in this case from 32bit to 64bit. Those translations have to be done by someone, and no one has tried it yet. I'm showing my ignorance here, but I'd really like to know: Is it so bad to just run a 32 bit kernel on on a sparc64 box? I know that with the solaris kernel you're actually going to lose performance in more cases where you'll gain it by booting the 64-bit kernel. Of course everyone runs the solaris 64-bit kernel on ultrasparc, and the decreases (if any) aren't likely to be perceptible anyways. I currently run the 64-bit Linux kernel on my 10 or so ultrasparc boxes running debian, but am I actually gaining anything? I realize the instruction set expanded with ultrasparc, so let's for argument's sake compare 32 and 64-bit kernels compiled with the v9 instruction set on ultrasparc. Sorry if this is something basic that I should know. -- Nate Campi http://www.campin.net The secret source of humour itself is not joy, but sorrow. There is no humour in heaven. - Samuel Clemens
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
In my experience, it's been unusable on anything big-endian. Daniel van Eeden wrote: Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 11:06:51AM +0100, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Has anyone of you successfully managed to use ipsec on a sparc64 machine? I've still never managed to get it working. I've basically given up on freeswan on SPARC64. Hopefully the ipsec implementation that's going in to Linux 2.6 will give better results. I don't remember the details of the freeswan problem, but it has something to do with the way ioctls are implemented on sparc64. There's some kind of translation or something that goes on in kernel space. But that's only what I can recall from my vague memories of hearing it explained; I've never actually looked at the code, and don't know my way around the kernel source well enough to know where to look. noah
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 11:06:51AM +0100, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Has anyone of you successfully managed to use ipsec on a sparc64 machine? I've still never managed to get it working. I've basically given up on freeswan on SPARC64. Hopefully the ipsec implementation that's going in to Linux 2.6 will give better results. I don't remember the details of the freeswan problem, but it has something to do with the way ioctls are implemented on sparc64. There's some kind of translation or something that goes on in kernel space. But that's only what I can recall from my vague memories of hearing it explained; I've never actually looked at the code, and don't know my way around the kernel source well enough to know where to look. noah -- ___ | Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/ | PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html pgpnMRenb6IMT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: sparc64 and ipsec anyone?
Is it an sparc64 only problem or is ipsec also unusable on sparc32? Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 11:06:51AM +0100, Ulrich Wurst wrote: Has anyone of you successfully managed to use ipsec on a sparc64 machine? I've still never managed to get it working. I've basically given up on freeswan on SPARC64. Hopefully the ipsec implementation that's going in to Linux 2.6 will give better results. I don't remember the details of the freeswan problem, but it has something to do with the way ioctls are implemented on sparc64. There's some kind of translation or something that goes on in kernel space. But that's only what I can recall from my vague memories of hearing it explained; I've never actually looked at the code, and don't know my way around the kernel source well enough to know where to look. noah -- +-+ | Daniel van Eeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | icq: 36952189 | | aim: Compukid128| | msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | phone: +31 343 522622 | | http://compukid.no-ip.org/about_me.html | +-+
