On 16.06.2014 11:56, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:53 AM, wrote:
>>> On the contrary I'd prefer if it doesn't. Nettle is an open project
>>> under LGPL that anyone can contribute and can be reused by a variety
>>> of software; polarssl is closed commercial project un
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:53 AM, wrote:
>> On the contrary I'd prefer if it doesn't. Nettle is an open project
>> under LGPL that anyone can contribute and can be reused by a variety
>> of software; polarssl is closed commercial project under a commercial
>> license with a GPLv2 exception.
> acc
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
>
>> That sounds better, but on the other side users wanting only dhcpv6
>> then get quite a lot of DNSSEC bloat.
>> I don't have numbers at hand, but we could explore static
>> libnettle-mini linking?
>
> No, I wasn't thinking about dropping t
On 16.06.2014 10:40, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
>> > Hi Nikos,
>> > Is there a reason for not having dnssec by default? If there is a way
>> > to disable it, I believe it will only be beneficial to have it in.
>> > The main problem here i
That sounds better, but on the other side users wanting only dhcpv6
then get quite a lot of DNSSEC bloat.
I don't have numbers at hand, but we could explore static
libnettle-mini linking?
No, I wasn't thinking about dropping the dhcpv6 variant just to add the
full variant as number 3 so we have
On the contrary I'd prefer if it doesn't. Nettle is an open project
under LGPL that anyone can contribute and can be reused by a variety
of software; polarssl is closed commercial project under a commercial
license with a GPLv2 exception.
Oh well, I sometimes have the feeling if its open-source
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
> my intention was more to add one build-variant dnsmasq-full with standard +
> dhcpv6 + authoritative + dnssec. As dnssec adds hundreds of KB of
> dependencies anyway I don't think the 10 or 20 KB of the other features make
> it particularly w
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
> Hi Nikos,
> Is there a reason for not having dnssec by default? If there is a way
> to disable it, I believe it will only be beneficial to have it in.
> The main problem here is that this increase the default image size
> significantly plus w
Hi Nikos,
Is there a reason for not having dnssec by default? If there is a way
to disable it, I believe it will only be beneficial to have it in.
The main problem here is that this increase the default image size
significantly plus we can't even reuse all the added crypto code because
none o
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Andre Heider wrote:
>>> could you please add nettle-mini support and make this a build variant
>>> instead of a config option, please?
>>> Build variant has the advantage that we can precompile it
Hi,
thanks for this.
my intention was more to add one build-variant dnsmasq-full with
standard + dhcpv6 + authoritative + dnssec. As dnssec adds hundreds of
KB of dependencies anyway I don't think the 10 or 20 KB of the other
features make it particularly worse or worth adding variants for ev
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Andre Heider wrote:
>> could you please add nettle-mini support and make this a build variant
>> instead of a config option, please?
>> Build variant has the advantage that we can precompile it as ipks because we
>> cannot enable dnssec by default.
> I posted a pa
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Steven Barth wrote:
> could you please add nettle-mini support and make this a build variant
> instead of a config option, please?
> Build variant has the advantage that we can precompile it as ipks because we
> cannot enable dnssec by default.
I posted a pa
On 15 June 2014 17:13, Steven Barth wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> could you please add nettle-mini support and make this a build variant
> instead of a config option, please?
> Build variant has the advantage that we can precompile it as ipks because we
> cannot enable dnssec by default.
There exists ne
Hi Andre,
could you please add nettle-mini support and make this a build variant
instead of a config option, please?
Build variant has the advantage that we can precompile it as ipks
because we cannot enable dnssec by default.
Otherwise thanks for your work.
Cheers,
Steven
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 17:34 +0200, Andre Heider wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this set adds DNSSEC validation to dnsmasq, tested on ar71xx.
>>
>> The set is pretty small and should be self explanatory.
>>
>> There's room for improvement thoug
On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 17:34 +0200, Andre Heider wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this set adds DNSSEC validation to dnsmasq, tested on ar71xx.
>
> The set is pretty small and should be self explanatory.
>
> There's room for improvement though:
> - compilation will fail under CONFIG_LIBNETTLE_MINI. I failed to e
Hi,
this set adds DNSSEC validation to dnsmasq, tested on ar71xx.
The set is pretty small and should be self explanatory.
There's room for improvement though:
- compilation will fail under CONFIG_LIBNETTLE_MINI. I failed to express the
dependencies so that this combination is not allowed... Hi
18 matches
Mail list logo
