[-current dropped (Bcc'ed)]

On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:58:06PM +0100, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
> -On [20010316 12:45], Ruslan Ermilov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:50:26AM +0100, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
> >> -On [20010316 10:43], Eugene Polovnikov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> [gif versus nos-tun]
> >Yes, gif(4) works the same way, and multihomed enabled (see gifconfig(8)),
> >with the exception that it always uses the IPPROTO_IPV4 (protocol 4) for
> >encapsulating of IPv4 payload.
> [gif preferred over nos-tun]
> >I fully agree.
> Noted.
> >> Translated, does gif do what nos-tun can do and more?  Yes?  Let's rip
> >> out nos-tun and support the other well maintained solution.
> >> 
> >Except that it does not allow to use proto 94 (the default for nos-tun).
> I'm sure we can work something out with the KAME guys over this, if it
> is necessary to keep this in.  *chalks up another task*
It should be pretty easy to add the ``int gif_pproto'' member to the
gif_softc structure, and expand gif_ioctl() interface to handle smth
like SIOC[SG]IFPPROTO (where PPROTO stands for "physical protocol").

Ruslan Ermilov          Oracle Developer/DBA,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]           Sunbay Software AG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]          FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251        Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org  The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com   Enabling The Information Age

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to