Is there a IPv6 Mailing list for FreeBSD/*BSD specifically? Has there
been any additional article since the Feb 2000 FreeBSDzine article,
which is out of date?
Jim
--
Unix is very user-friendly. It's just picky who its friends are.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with INRIA
>yet.
A news about NRL/INRIA/KAME merging (unified-ipv6).
unified-ipv6 project has been in big trouble with manpower, design
differences. Recently situations changed for all of us so here's
the decision we have made.
NRL decided to conc
>>>>> On Sat, 06 May 2000 13:15:00 -0400
>>>>> James Housley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
jim> Is there a IPv6 Mailing list for FreeBSD/*BSD specifically?
How about [EMAIL PROTECTED]? It is for KAME, but FreeBSD's IPv6
code came from KAME.
There is [E
If memory serves me right, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 06 May 2000 13:15:00 -0400
> >>>>> James Housley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> jim> Is there a IPv6 Mailing list for FreeBSD/*BSD specifically?
>
> How about [EMAIL PROTECT
with INRIA
>yet.
A news about NRL/INRIA/KAME merging (unified-ipv6).
unified-ipv6 project has been in big trouble with manpower, design
differences. Recently situations changed for all of us so here's
the decision we have made.
NRL decided to conc
Hello there,
I wonder if anybody here has any experience with compiling
pure IPv6 system without IPv4 support in the kernel at all?
Are there any projects like that?
Alexis
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Hi all,
Does anyone know if there are any IPv6 CVS servers for FreeBSD? (As in
receiving the STABLE and ports branches) I currently use cvs.freebsd.org but
it dosent have an record.
Ta
Peg
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi,
I have freebsd 4.2. I configured prefixes as follows.
prefix rl0 3ffe:501::100::
andprefix rl0 3ffe:501::100::
prefixlen 32
I got some error messages. But when i checked ndp and
ifconfig rl0 two
prefixes and two addresses were there.
Now when i delete them
In which version will it be/ or is it possible to use ipv6 adressen for a jail?
regards,
oPr
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Found this on slashdot.
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/990705hn3com.xml
There is a link to www.ipv6.org which lists IPv6 implementations. FreeBSD
is listed as well as Linux, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Linux ships with IPv6,
OpenBSD will ship it's next version with IPv6. Any
With both firefox and chrome, if I browse to
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/teams/bos
the computer hangs forever "Waiting for l.yimg.com". If I browse to
http://dvd.netflix.com/, the computer hangs forever "Waiting for
cdn-0.nflxing.com".
I've been using IPv6 for quite a f
Out of a perhaps morbid curiosity, I'm somewhat interested in setting up
an IPv6 stack on my computer. From what I can tell there are two well
supported stacks. Kame and Inria, and both support 2.2.8, Kame also
supports 3.x. Has anyone tried to port either to -current? I tried
playing a
has anybody heard of an IPv6 option in BIND 8.2 configuration file.
It's not documented in the configuration guide, but I would need it if it
exists.
Thanks to forward it on another mailng list if hackers is not the good one
for it.
Byee
Sebastien MARAUX
To Unsubscribe:
Sebastien,
IPv6 records are supported since BIND 4.9.5 ( records). If you are
looking for a named server that listens on an IPv6 socket, look at the
bind patch on http://www.kame.net
Florent.
Sebastien Maraux writes:
> has anybody heard of an IPv6 option in BIND 8.2 configuration f
Found this on slashdot.
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/990705hn3com.xml
There is a link to www.ipv6.org which lists IPv6 implementations. FreeBSD
is listed as well as Linux, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Linux ships with IPv6,
OpenBSD will ship it's next version with IPv6. Any
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:20:52PM +0200, Alexis Yushin wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> I wonder if anybody here has any experience with compiling
> pure IPv6 system without IPv4 support in the kernel at all?
>
> Are there any projects like that?
It's probably not all that dif
llo there,
>>
>> I wonder if anybody here has any experience with compiling
>> pure IPv6 system without IPv4 support in the kernel at all?
>>
>> Are there any projects like that?
>
>It's probably not all that difficult, as these things go, but it
>re
Is inetd wrapping and hosts.allow supposed to support IPv6 addresses?
Because it isn't for me. Not only that but added an IPv6 address to
hosts.allow seems to prevent processing of IPv4 anddress on that line.
If it should and is broken I will submit a PR. If not I will look and
see if
Hello.
I made diffs to ANSI the IPv6 stack in both OpenBSD and NetBSD and
here comes my version for FreeBSD. NetBSD has already commited their
diff and it would be good if all the *BSD have the same style for it.
Diff can be found here:
http://213.113.152.10/freebsd_ipv6.diff
br
dunceor
Hi!
Is the ipv6 routing to www.FreeBSD.org broken? This traceroute6 is from a
Comcast cablemodem line in Santa Clara, CA.
traceroute6 to www.freebsd.org (2001:4f8:fff6::21) from
2002:4c67:29ce::216:cbff:fead:95f9, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets
1 2002:4c67:29ce::21b:63ff:fef5:89a1 1.938 ms
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:16:35PM +0400, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, 19:52+1000, Tim Clewlow wrote:
>
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Does anyone know if there are any IPv6 CVS servers for FreeBSD? (As
> > > in
> > >
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stefan Sperling
> Sent: 05 August 2008 11:51
> To: Maxim Konovalov
> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Pegasus Mc Cleaft; Tim Clewlow
> Subject: Re: IPv6 CVS
>
&
Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:16:35PM +0400, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, 19:52+1000, Tim Clewlow wrote:
Hi all,
Does anyone know if there are any IPv6 CVS servers for FreeBSD? (As
in
receiving the STABLE and ports branches) I currently use
cvs.freebsd.org
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know if there are any IPv6 CVS servers for FreeBSD? (As
> in
> receiving the STABLE and ports branches) I currently use
> cvs.freebsd.org but
> it dosent have an record.
>
> Ta
>
> Peg
> dig cvsup4.freebsd.org
; <<
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, 19:52+1000, Tim Clewlow wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anyone know if there are any IPv6 CVS servers for FreeBSD? (As
> > in
> > receiving the STABLE and ports branches) I currently use
> > cvs.freebsd.org but
> > it dosen
> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Pegasus Mc Cleaft; Tim Clewlow
> > Subject: Re: IPv6 CVS
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:16:35PM +0400, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, 19:52+1000, Tim Clewlow wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > &
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeremy Chadwick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 05 August 2008 13:28
> To: Pegasus Mc Cleaft
> Cc: 'Stefan Sperling'; 'Maxim Konovalov'; freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org;
> 'Tim Clewlow'
> Subject: Re: IPv
Behalf Of Stefan Sperling
> > > Sent: 05 August 2008 11:51
> > > To: Maxim Konovalov
> > > Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Pegasus Mc Cleaft; Tim Clewlow
> > > Subject: Re: IPv6 CVS
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:16:35
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:34:09PM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote:
> The problem is cvsupd - since it's written in Modula3 and doesn't
> support IPv6 you have to use an inetd/netcat hack to accept IPv6
> connections on the server. As mentioned in
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermai
On Thursday 07 August 2008 19:47:31 David Malone wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:34:09PM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote:
> > The problem is cvsupd - since it's written in Modula3 and doesn't
> > support IPv6 you have to use an inetd/netcat hack to accept IPv6
> >
Hello All,
I am working on IPv6 Extension Headers Implementation.
I am confused with freeBSD implementation and RFC2460 specification
for Destination Options.
My interpretation from RFC2460 is that, If a packet consists of
hop-by-hop and destination extension headers, destination header
should
Hello folks,
Does anyone know if FreeBSD 4.x or 5.x is affected by the Ipv6 mbuf
vulnerability
just like OpenBSD?
http://www.coresecurity.com/index.php5?module=ContentMod&action=item&id=1703
Thanks,
Subhash
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Hello folks,
Is there a plan to implement ipv6 SEND (secure NDP) in FreeBSD?
There's a userspace implementation by DoCoMo, but thats not yet
in the official ports collection.
Thanks,
--Subhash
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi,
Can anybody tell me if it's possbile to tell a given interface not to
do DAD ? Specifically, when using the tun device for PPP, PPP
negotiates it's own endpoint (link-local) addresses with the peer.
However, it doesn't look possible to stop the kernel from doing DAD
unless we already ha
>Found this on slashdot.
>http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/990705hn3com.xml
>There is a link to www.ipv6.org which lists IPv6 implementations. FreeBSD
>is listed as well as Linux, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Linux ships with IPv6,
>OpenBSD will ship it's next ve
Hi!
I have created a script to integrate FreBSD 3.2, KAME and PAO.
As a result I have the following source trees:
- FREEBSD+KAME("make world" is working :-)
- FREEBSD+PAO (haven't tested yet, no conflicts)
- FREEBSD+KAME+PAO(haven't tested yet, 2 minor conflicts)
Once I have
ovide IPv6/IPsec reference code to *BSD,
so we of course continue to work on KAME/FreeBSD, KAME/BSDI, and
KAME/NetBSD. We are trying to support KAME/OpenBSD (so that no
major BSDs are left out from our support list).
- KAME project is NOT itojun's personal pr
Hello,
Last night I worked to port some code to FreeBSD 3.2 Stable.
I was curious about one fact: on there is no any in6_addr
support for IPv6. Am I wrong ? FreeBSD does not support IPv6 ?
Regards,
Stef
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hacker
I have just set up IPv6 on my network at home, and there was much
rejoicing. :-)
Now the problem is that legacy apps don't have v6 support. One idea I
have
floating around in my head is the idea of a socks-like combination of
libc
support and faith to allow IPv6-only networks to participa
ing for
> cdn-0.nflxing.com".
>
> I've been using IPv6 for quite a few years without problems and I've
> had no difficulty browsing www.ipv6.org and other IPv6 sites over IPv6,
> and my system serves www.worldcon.org over IPv6 as well. Further, I can
> ping6 and
to "GET / HTTP/1.1"). So what's the most likely point of failure?
^^
you already answered your question :)
check
telnet ... 80
GET http://fullsitename/ HTTP/1.1
if it doesn't work it's their failure
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.o
Possibly DNS. Try http://test-ipv6.com
for sure not. he tested telnet to the same host - by name.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ha
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 05:09:36PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >to "GET / HTTP/1.1"). So what's the most likely point of failure?
> ^^
>
> you already answered your question :)
>
> check
>
>
> telnet ... 80
> GET http://fullsitename/ HTTP/1.1
Full URL is only valid for p
telnet ... 80
GET http://fullsitename/ HTTP/1.1
Full URL is only valid for proxies. What you want to do is:
GET / HTTP/1.0
Host: fullsitename
tested on most sites - ALL three ways do work. Of course yours are proper.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.or
On 07/02/2012 04:12, George Mitchell wrote:
> I've been using IPv6 for quite a few years without problems and I've
> had no difficulty browsing
Many more sites are actually putting, or have put, IPv6 into production
since the latest world IPv6 day last month. Some growing pain
Many more sites are actually putting, or have put, IPv6 into production
since the latest world IPv6 day last month. Some growing pains are
inevitable.
i've actually had IPv6 working 5 years ago, but only as tunneled and still
no operators here provide IPv6.
Nothing special. As they need
On 07/02/12 16:29, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/02/2012 04:12, George Mitchell wrote:
I've been using IPv6 for quite a few years without problems and I've
had no difficulty browsing
Many more sites are actually putting, or have put, IPv6 into production
since the latest world IPv6 day
On 07/10/12 21:53, George Mitchell wrote:
On 07/02/12 16:29, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/02/2012 04:12, George Mitchell wrote:
I've been using IPv6 for quite a few years without problems and I've
had no difficulty browsing
Many more sites are actually putting, or have put, IPv6 into
Me <--ethernet, MTU1500, native IPv6--> mattapan <-|
|
World <-- v6 in v4 tunnel, gif0, MTU1280---|
(mattapan is my FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE router, "Me" is running 9.0-STABLE.)
If I run "route change -inet6 :: -mt
On 23-May-99 Alex Zepeda wrote:
> Out of a perhaps morbid curiosity, I'm somewhat interested in setting up
> an IPv6 stack on my computer. From what I can tell there are two well
> supported stacks. Kame and Inria, and both support 2.2.8, Kame also
> supports 3.x. Has any
On Sun, 23 May 1999, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
> I already mailed Itojun-san about the status of the KAME/Inria merger and
> hope to hear from him soon.
Well, I finally got the userland shit working!
This would make an awesome port, it compiles out of the box, and works
with bpf to d
>Found this on slashdot.
>http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/990705hn3com.xml
>There is a link to www.ipv6.org which lists IPv6 implementations. FreeBSD
>is listed as well as Linux, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Linux ships with IPv6,
>OpenBSD will ship it's next version
Hi!
I have created a script to integrate FreBSD 3.2, KAME and PAO.
As a result I have the following source trees:
- FREEBSD+KAME("make world" is working :-)
- FREEBSD+PAO (haven't tested yet, no conflicts)
- FREEBSD+KAME+PAO(haven't tested yet, 2 minor conflicts)
Once I have
I heard that, some of you, got confused by recent news about
additional NetBSD-core guys (me).
The above fact does not change anything about KAME-FreeBSD
relationship (I can only speak for KAME side though), because:
- KAME project's goal is to provide
Hello,
Is there any ongoing work on adding support for IPv6 to BSNMP? Do you
have an idea of how much effort it would need?
Thanks in advance.
--
My preferred quotation of Robert Louis Stevenson is "You cannot
make an omelette without breaking eggs". Not because I like the
omel
Hello Current and Hackers,
With the recent changes to /etc/rc.d for network start-up. I was
wondering
what is now correct. The previously working ipv6 configuration no longer
creates a static default route, and I have not been able to figure out why.
After boot, if I manually add the
>>>>> On Tue, 16 May 2000 16:10:28 -0400
>>>>> James Housley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
jim> Is inetd wrapping and hosts.allow supposed to support IPv6 addresses?
jim> Because it isn't for me. Not only that but added an IPv6 address to
jim&g
"Hajimu UMEMOTO ($BG_K\(B $BH%(B)" wrote:
>
> Yes, I wrote IPv6 support code for tcp_wrappers. And, actually, I'm
> using it.
> How do you specify IPv6 address? IPv6 address has `:' in it and it
> conflict with tcp_wrappers's field separator.
>>>>> On Tue, 16 May 2000 16:37:07 -0400
>>>>> James Housley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> How do you specify IPv6 address? IPv6 address has `:' in it and it
> conflict with tcp_wrappers's field separator. So, you need to wrap
> IPv6 address
On Apr 12, 2008, at 12:15 AM, Markus Boelter wrote:
Hi!
Is the ipv6 routing to www.FreeBSD.org broken? This traceroute6 is
from a
Comcast cablemodem line in Santa Clara, CA.
traceroute6 to www.freebsd.org (2001:4f8:fff6::21) from
2002:4c67:29ce::216:cbff:fead:95f9, 30 hops max, 12 byte
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 12:17:19PM -0700, Subhash Gopinath wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Does anyone know if FreeBSD 4.x or 5.x is affected by the Ipv6 mbuf
> vulnerability
> just like OpenBSD?
>
> http://www.coresecurity.com/index.php5?module=ContentMod&action=item&
On 4/19/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know if FreeBSD 4.x or 5.x is affected by the Ipv6 mbuf
> vulnerability
> just like OpenBSD?
>
As discussed on the security@ list at the time, no.
Here is a mirror I found of the original thread:
http://www.
Subhash Gopinath wrote:
> Does anyone know if FreeBSD 4.x or 5.x is affected by the Ipv6 mbuf
> vulnerability just like OpenBSD?
>
> http://www.coresecurity.com/index.php5?module=ContentMod&action=item&id=1703
The project ipv6 experts have convinced me that FreeBSD is
Network Planning and Projects
NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY
Key 70EF9882: DEC2 C685 1ED4 C95A 145F 4300 6F64 7B00 70EF 9882
On Tue, 8 May 2007, Subhash Gopinath wrote:
Hello folks,
Is there a plan to implement ipv6 SEND (secure NDP) in FreeBSD?
There's a userspace implementation by DoCoMo, but that
Janos Mohacsi
Network Engineer, Research Associate, Head of Network Planning and Projects
NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY
Key 70EF9882: DEC2 C685 1ED4 C95A 145F 4300 6F64 7B00 70EF 9882
On Tue, 8 May 2007, Subhash Gopinath wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Is there a plan to implement ipv6 SEND (
ll connectivity. but starting tcpdump ahead of time mostly
doesn't.
the hosts are accepting rtadv and the routers are forwarding ipv6 traffic.
the same behaviour if I set up IPv4...
HN wicontrol output
NIC serial number: [ 99SA0100 ]
Station name:
brian> Can anybody tell me if it's possbile to tell a given interface
brian> not to do DAD ?
There is a kernel MIB, 'net.inet6.ip6.dad_count'. See inet6(4)
manpage for more detail.
However, there is no way to stop DAD for any given interfaces; only
we have two choices, 'do DAD to any interface
>
> brian> Can anybody tell me if it's possbile to tell a given interface
> brian> not to do DAD ?
>
> There is a kernel MIB, 'net.inet6.ip6.dad_count'. See inet6(4)
> manpage for more detail.
>
> However, there is no way to stop DAD for any given interfaces; only
> we have two choices, 'do DA
brian> Would it be worth bringing up the subject of adding an IFF_ flag that
brian> can be SIOCSIFFLAGS'd into the interface with the kame team ?
I cannot tell it's good and/or standard-compliant things or not... but,
brian> If you think it's worth bringing up with the kame guys, can you tell
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote:
> brian> Would it be worth bringing up the subject of adding an IFF_ flag that
> brian> can be SIOCSIFFLAGS'd into the interface with the kame team ?
>
> I cannot tell it's good and/or standard-compliant things or not... but,
>
> brian> If you thi
- FreeBSD+PAO
- no conflicts during merge
- hasn't been tested (because I need IPv6)
- FreeBSD+KAME+PAO
- one conflict during merge (if_ed.c) but it's trivial to fix
- hasn't been tested (I didn't have time to test this)
- "make release" hasn't b
> KAME team really needs your suggestions on how to integrate crypto
> part. In case of NetBSD/KAME integration, we did like this:
> - place IPsec core part and AH part into cvs.netbsd.org (in US)
> - place ESP part and crypto algorithms (DES, Blowfish and whatever
>
>> KAME team really needs your suggestions on how to integrate crypto
>> part. In case of NetBSD/KAME integration, we did like this:
>> - place IPsec core part and AH part into cvs.netbsd.org (in US)
>> - place ESP part and crypto algorithms (DES, Blowfish and whatever
>>
> Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code?
> (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*).
I'd say it makes a lot of sense.
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
> >I'll be very happy to work with you on this one.
>
> Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code?
> (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*).
I wonder...
There was a contrib/sys (where softupdates went), and that got moved
to sys/contrib.
Perhaps something simil
In message <10335.936082907@localhost>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
>> Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code?
>> (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*).
>
>I'd say it makes a lot of sense.
Yes, but shouldn't it be src/sys/crypto if we want to have
"kern-develop
>>> Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code?
>>> (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*).
>>I'd say it makes a lot of sense.
>Yes, but shouldn't it be src/sys/crypto if we want to have
>"kern-developer" still have a sensible meaning ? (and for
>all the other reason
> FYI, There are crypto-related files in the following locations.
> I'll take a detailed look into both repositories...
Thanks! It makes the most sense to keep this exactly as it it, except
for the files in src/sys/netinet6/ which should move to src/sys/crypto/
if they have crypto in
On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Mark Murray wrote:
> > >I'll be very happy to work with you on this one.
> >
> > Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code?
> > (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*).
>
> I wonder...
>
> There was a contrib/sys (where softupdates went), and th
Hmmm. That's a point. I was thinking primarily of the "segregate the
crypto" issue, but you're right that this would also put us back to
the "bad old days" where sys/ was broken across multiple directories.
Hmph. I guess common sense wins over ITAR in this case. :)
- Jordan
> In message <103
In message <506.936093482@localhost>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
>Hmmm. That's a point. I was thinking primarily of the "segregate the
>crypto" issue, but you're right that this would also put us back to
>the "bad old days" where sys/ was broken across multiple directories.
>
>Hmph. I guess co
>Hmmm. That's a point. I was thinking primarily of the "segregate the
>crypto" issue, but you're right that this would also put us back to
>the "bad old days" where sys/ was broken across multiple directories.
>Hmph. I guess common sense wins over ITAR in this case. :)
Yes, this is ve
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
: >Hmph. I guess common sense wins over ITAR in this case. :)
:
: That's certainly an improvement in that particular battle :-)
Speaking of ITAR, has anybody actually every approached FreeBSD to say
what we're doing is in violation of ITA
> Speaking of ITAR, has anybody actually every approached FreeBSD to say
> what we're doing is in violation of ITAR?
IANAL, but IIRC, ITAR is dead; Wasssenaar is the bogeyman these days
(at least outside the USA).
The DoD, DoJ, DoE, DoC and watever other Do's you guys have are all
passing the bu
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
> : >Hmph. I guess common sense wins over ITAR in this case. :)
> :
> : That's certainly an improvement in that particular battle :-)
>
> Speaking of ITAR, has anybody actually every approached FreeBSD to say
> what we're doing is in vi
Mark Murray writes :
> > Speaking of ITAR, has anybody actually every approached FreeBSD to say
> > what we're doing is in violation of ITAR?
>
> IANAL, but IIRC, ITAR is dead; Wasssenaar is the bogeyman these days
> (at least outside the USA).
>
> The DoD, DoJ, DoE, DoC and watever other Do's y
Itojun,
does KAME IPv6 and IPSec define additional facilities for
syslog? I have been working with IPSec devices from a company called
Network-Alchemy. They have additional syslog facilities including:
IKE, IPSEC, L2TP, LOGIN (should be AUTH?), PPTP and others.
Does KAME IPv6
> does KAME IPv6 and IPSec define additional facilities for
>syslog? I have been working with IPSec devices from a company called
>Network-Alchemy. They have additional syslog facilities including:
>IKE, IPSEC, L2TP, LOGIN (should be AUTH?), PPTP and others.
>
>
well, i hate to tell ya, no, currently FBSD does not support IPv6/IPng.
but, there are a couple packages where you can get it to support it.
do a search for KAME, and download that.
now, as to why it's not rolled in already?
my guess is that it's due to IPng/IPv6 still b
Hi,
Well, on Linux 2.2 IPv6/IPng it is already supported. I don't remember
exactly starting with what version of Linux they have already support
IPv6 but for instance BSDI also is supporting.
So I think we must support quite soon IPv6/IPng for a lot of
Client-Server application which will
Well and more details from mailing list is that there is no "standard"
for IPv6 yet.
Somebody could explain a little bit here what really means this when
DEC, HP they have already on the TCP stack the newest IP ?
Stef
stefan parvu wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Last night I worke
stefan parvu wrote:
>
> Well and more details from mailing list is that there is no "standard"
> for IPv6 yet.
> Somebody could explain a little bit here what really means this when
> DEC, HP they have already on the TCP stack the newest IP ?
Search for ipv6 in the Free
According to stefan parvu:
> I was curious about one fact: on there is no any in6_addr
> support for IPv6. Am I wrong ? FreeBSD does not support IPv6 ?
Our Japanese friends are working to integrate IPv6 into current. For -STABLE,
you have at least 3 implementations that works fairl
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Ollivier Robert wrote:
> NetBSD & OpenBSD has decided to use one of the last two for themselves
> (although I always forgot who took what -- I think NetBSD took INRIA and
> OpenBSD NRL but I could be wrong).
FWIW, the KAME implementation was integrated into NetBSD-current ar
According to Andy Doran:
> FWIW, the KAME implementation was integrated into NetBSD-current around
> the start of July.
Thanks for the correction ! Nice to ehar that.
--
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 4.0-CURRENT #74: Thu Sep 9 0
stefan parvu wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Last night I worked to port some code to FreeBSD 3.2 Stable.
> I was curious about one fact: on there is no any in6_addr
> support for IPv6. Am I wrong ? FreeBSD does not support IPv6 ?
Sure it does. It just doesn't come out of the bo
I have a filtering bridge that I am also trying to use as a 6to4 router.
Alas,
IPv6 does not appear to work correctly with the bridge.
If I configure the interface on one side of the bridge, it is not
ping6able by
hosts on the other side. If I configure both sides with separate
prefixes, then
Hi all,
I've been playing around with IPv6 networking on FreeBSD release 8.2 and
found that there seems to be no strong incoming host model as specified in
RFC 1122.
I've spotted that in IPv4 there is the sysctl "net.inet.ip.check_interface"
which defaults to set, but I&#x
I am writing a kernel socket program which binds to a IPv6 address, so bind
always fails with 49. Below is the code snippet I am using, is something wrong
here?
roundhay# uname -a
FreeBSD roundhay 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #2: Mon Apr 8 16:15:06 IST
2013
root@roundhay:/usr/obj
- FreeBSD+PAO
- no conflicts during merge
- hasn't been tested (because I need IPv6)
- FreeBSD+KAME+PAO
- one conflict during merge (if_ed.c) but it's trivial to fix
- hasn't been tested (I didn't have time to test this)
- "make release" hasn't b
1 - 100 of 222 matches
Mail list logo
