From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Moore Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Labeled networking patches for 2.6.26 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:25:59 -0400 Message-ID: <200804101725.59604.paul.moore@hp.com> References: <20080409204936.26774.55254.stgit@flek.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from g4t0016.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.19]:18778 "EHLO g4t0016.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756875AbYDJV0C (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:26:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080409204936.26774.55254.stgit@flek.lan> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Just a quick follow-up on testing, I've run this for a few hours on two Fedora systems with both labeled and unlabeled IPsec in use with SAs rekeying every 5 minutes and didn't notice anything evil. At this point I'd strip the "RFC" from the patchset and ask that they be considered for inclusion in 2.6.26 assuming there are no objections. -- paul moore linux @ hp