Re: [Swan-dev] questions about find_next_v2_host_connection

2021-12-22 Thread Andrew Cagney
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 21:42, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > if (peer_id != NULL && !same_id(peer_id, >spd.that.id) && > > > (c->spd.that.id.kind != ID_FROMCERT && !id_is_any(>spd.that.id))) { > > > continue; /* incompatible ID */ > > > } > > More

Re: [Swan-dev] questions about find_next_v2_host_connection

2021-12-19 Thread Andrew Cagney
> > > > > > if (peer_id != NULL && !same_id(peer_id, >spd.that.id) && > > (c->spd.that.id.kind != ID_FROMCERT && !id_is_any(>spd.that.id))) { > > continue; /* incompatible ID */ > > } More coffee. I think this and the peer_id parameter should be deleted. -

Re: [Swan-dev] questions about find_next_v2_host_connection

2021-12-19 Thread Andrew Cagney
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 17:54, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote: > > Why does this deal with V1? > > Its name includes "v2", so that suggests that it does not. > > It has a local variable "ike_version" which is immutably IKEv2. > > And yet it has a comment that includes the line > > * (2) kind of

[Swan-dev] questions about find_next_v2_host_connection

2021-12-19 Thread D. Hugh Redelmeier
Why does this deal with V1? Its name includes "v2", so that suggests that it does not. It has a local variable "ike_version" which is immutably IKEv2. And yet it has a comment that includes the line * (2) kind of IKEV1 (POLICY_AGGRESSIVE) /* * Success may require