On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Robert Moskowitz rgm@htt-consult.comwrote:
Rob Townley wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.commailto: rgm@htt-consult.com> wrote:
Um, as the original poster, I WANT IPv6. Not make IPv4 lookups faster by ignoring AAAA records.
Further testing has IPv6 working just fine. Thing is when I enable the HIP API intercepts, FIrefox does not work. Like they are doing something 'non-standard' with the regualr TCP socket API so that HIP can't slide in there. I tried disabling a number of options, thinking it might be some security setting, but if it is, I have not found it.
Yep, i fully understood you wanted IPv6. i just thought you might want to verify what settings you have for Firefox -- making sure Firefox has turned on IPv6 dns.
Default was on.
Just curious, what is the motivation for the HIP api stuff, it is not there by default is it?
read the RFCs on HIP: 4423 and 5201-5206.
4423 provides the justification of HIP and its architecture. I created HIP almost 10 years ago, shortly after (as IPsec co-chair) got the IPsec RFCs out. HIP is much more than an alternative keying protocol for ESP (compared to IKE). It directly addresses secure mobility. HIP **IS** an important change to the TCP/IP architecture; this has been part of its slow advancement. As such it has its own 'native' API: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hip-native-api-05.txt.
I can go into more about HIP if you wish.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
So HIP isn't in any distribution by default or is it? How does one know? Would it make sense to include HIP in a Wireless Access Point firmware or a RADIUS type machine? Looks interesting, will have to keep it in mind for wlan sec.