| To: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Ipsec-tools-devel] Re: IPSEC: on behavior of acquire |
| From: | Aidas Kasparas <a.kasparas@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:59:27 +0300 |
| Cc: | ipsec-tools-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1112618007.1096.465.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1112405303.1096.37.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <424E454D.4090402@xxxxxx> <1112477326.1088.321.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <424FA946.70809@xxxxxx> <1112538566.1096.391.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <425067D9.9050603@xxxxxx> <1112618007.1096.465.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116) |
jamal wrote: I think i have made a bad case of explaining. Yes, I know where acquires terminate. However this is not about where acquires terminate. It is insufficient to assume that a succesful acquire to user space equates to successful interaction to the KE server which will do an update. Why? -- Aidas Kasparas IT administrator GM Consult Group, UAB |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Linux support for RDMA (was: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics), Ming Zhang |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events, Herbert Xu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Ipsec-tools-devel] Re: IPSEC: on behavior of acquire, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Ipsec-tools-devel] Re: IPSEC: on behavior of acquire, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |