>My reason for pointing out that Theo and the boys had issues with the
>license is because the issues *may* be pertinent to NetBSD. If the
>OpenBSD answer is a fork when the offending code may be omitted at
>compile time, then they may be making unnecessary work for themselves.

	we may need a professional legal advice on it - once code goes into
	openssl repository, it is unclear if Sun changes are all inside #ifdef,
	or not.  so i'm not sure if we can avoid Sun license by doing #define
	NO_SUN_CODE.  as a matter of fact, if you see the latest openssl
	repository, license boilerplate is outside of #ifdef OPENSSL_NO_EC. 

	if the code fork is the only solution, we'll need to do the same
	(or import open-openssl from openbsd).

itojun