On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 11:39, Antony Antony wrote:
>
> first quick answer to Hugh's follow up questions.
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:58:45AM -0500, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> > Has iface-ip been advertised?
>
> no. code is incomplete. We can change at this point. I would be happy to.
> Though
first quick answer to Hugh's follow up questions.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:58:45AM -0500, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> Has iface-ip been advertised?
no. code is incomplete. We can change at this point. I would be happy to.
Though Paul may have signoff. My recollection is, he want something
Well, a bit of a segway.
Thanks to your efforts our tests are far more stable and this has
allowed me to increase testing's workload (the reason runs went from
3.5 to 2.5 hours is that I upped the # parallel boots). However, it's
also exposed what I suspect is yet another problem with 9p. On
General comment:
We have way too many options.
We cannot lightly delete any that have been advertised in a release.
Has iface-ip been advertised?
Andrew's points all seem valid too. But I haven't thought deeply about
this.
___
Swan-dev mailing list
I noticed this user visible addition:
whack.h: ip_subnet ifaceip;
keywords.c:509: { "iface-ip", kv_conn | kv_leftright ,
kt_subnet, KSCF_IFACE_IP, NULL, NULL, },
the problem I see is that, contrary to the name, it isn't an IP (i.e,
ip address). Rather, to use IKEv2 terminology, its a
