Subject: Re: Reminder that we are supporting two parallel IPsec implementations
To: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 09/12/2003 16:40:53
On Friday, September 12, 2003, at 02:35 PM, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> So? You're saying that kernfs does somethign well, and is the best
> in certain circumstances? So why not use it? If that means it's what's
> needed (i.e. required), then so be it. We can see what we think about
> and go from there.
The point is that kernfs is NOT REQUIRED to fix the problem. You can
completely fix the problem within PF_KEY, as Matt Thomas pointed out.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>