Subject: Re: Reminder that we are supporting two parallel IPsec implementations
To: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/12/2003 19:48:56
>> i don't understand why sys/netipsec has to have another PF_KEY
>> implementation. could you tell me why?
>Sam Leffler's fast-ipsec is a rework in detail, to improve performance
>The re-implemenetation of PF_KEY is part and parcel of that "rework in
>detail". I understand the rework is ongoing (that is, more performance
>enhancments are planned), but you'd be better off asking Sam.
i looked at the diff between netipsec/key* and netkey/key*.
the changes are minimal. i will remove the former and put #ifdef
FAST_IPSEC into the former.