Re: [Babel-users] Question about the status of RFC7298

> I'm working on securing routing metrics from forgery rather than > actual encryption/security for the data in transit. I doubt what I > come up with will end up meeting anyone else's requirements nor be > upstreamable due to just how much I'll probably end up touching on. You might be

Re: [Babel-users] Question about the status of RFC7298

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > So while I encourage you to look at Denis' work, and while I'd love to see > it forward-ported to head, please do not be overly disappointed if the > final approach to securing Babel turns out to be something else. I'm

Re: [Babel-users] Question about the status of RFC7298

Thank you very much! I did see that repo when I was trying to find this, but the tagline threw me off. I'll try and rebase it off of master and see what I can do about updating it and adding asymmetric key support. On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: >

Re: [Babel-users] Question about the status of RFC7298

On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 13:25:05 +0100 justin kilpatrick wrote >Hello everyone, I've been working on a implementation of Batman-adv >with asymmetric key signing/verification of overhead packets for a few >months now. I'm not much of a kernel programmer so calling it rough >would be