Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 01:17:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail406.noc.n-bone.net (mail4.noc.n-bone.net [138.243.50.144]) by oss.sgi.com (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j3C8HIsP013918 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 01:17:18 -0700 Received: from [192.168.2.151] (polaris.linux-ipv6.org [203.178.140.10]) by mail406.noc.n-bone.net (NBONE-MTA) with ESMTP id E2E5D1077; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:17:06 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <425B8401.1010609@linux-ipv6.org> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:17:05 +0900 From: Masahide NAKAMURA User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hadi@cyberus.ca, Herbert Xu Cc: "David S. Miller" , Patrick McHardy , netdev Subject: Re: [5/*] [IPSEC] Use XFRM_MSG_* instead of XFRM_SAP_* References: <1112702604.1089.119.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050409105452.GA7171@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050409111244.GB7171@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050409111551.GA7378@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050410074849.GA13259@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050410090250.GA26022@gondor.apana.org.au> <1113142510.1091.294.camel@jzny.localdomain> <425A0F00.8070509@linux-ipv6.org> <1113218805.1089.357.camel@jzny.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1113218805.1089.357.camel@jzny.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/819/Sun Apr 10 17:01:27 2005 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-archive-position: 1683 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: nakam@linux-ipv6.org Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev Content-Length: 741 Lines: 28 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 iproute2/ip). 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 Thanks, -- Masahide NAKAMURA