From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13]: Netfilter IPsec support Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:17:14 +0100 Message-ID: <4383C31A.40101@trash.net> References: <20051120163128.16666.38111.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20051122.143438.84749134.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20051122.143438.84749134.davem@davemloft.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org David S. Miller wrote: > From: Patrick McHardy > Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:31:28 +0100 > > >>This is the latest netfilter/IPsec patchset. Its purpose is to make >>IPsec look as much as a normal tunnel device to netfilter as possible >>and to enable NAT support. > > > I think there are some of these patches that we can merge in > right now into net-2.6.16... > > I want to do this so that Patrick doesn't have to repost > 13 or so patches every time one of the parts still under > discussion gets changed. > > Actually, it seems the only part under discussion is how to > avoid extension header reparsing and routing re-lookups on > the ipv6 side. That could be fixed by a follow-on patch and > is not %100 necessary for initial integration in my opinion. > > Can I get agreement on that? Patrick sends me a dump of the > current state of his patch set right now, we put that into > net-2.6.16, and fix problems with followon patches. > > Ok? I would appreciate that, but I want to have a look closer look at Herbert's patches first. Unfortunately its late and I have to get up early, so its going to take me a day.