[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [5/*] [IPSEC] Use XFRM_MSG_* instead of XFRM_SAP_*

To: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [5/*] [IPSEC] Use XFRM_MSG_* instead of XFRM_SAP_*
From: Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:17:05 +0900
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1113218805.1089.357.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1112702604.1089.119.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050409105452.GA7171@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050409111244.GB7171@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050409111551.GA7378@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050410074849.GA13259@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050410090250.GA26022@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1113142510.1091.294.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <425A0F00.8070509@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1113218805.1089.357.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116)
Hello Herbert and Jamal,

jamal wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 01:45, Masahide NAKAMURA wrote:
>>>Do you have anymore patches? If not i can give these a quick test;
>>>Masahide has a better test setup and if he has time he should as well.
>>I can, but about 24 hours later. I'll test it there is no update and
>>if it isn't too late then.

short report:
My testing is not completed but, I've tested below and it is fine:
 add/del/flush SP and their notifications through netlink (using modified 

 new "xfrm_userpolicy_delete" works fine on this case;
 used byid=1 when deleting SP with specifying SP index.

I'll test the rest case (17 hours later):
- using pfkey
- using both sockets



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>