Hi, Sorry for early send. What comes to the patches, they are still where they have been all along. Seems frr formatting documentation got changed and is now misrendering the link. Try: https://git.alpinelinux.org/user/tteras/strongswan/log/?h=tteras-release https://git.alpinelinux.org/user/tteras/strongswan/log/?h=tteras But seems a rebase is needed. Timo On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:04:29 +0200 Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi> wrote:
Hi,
strongswan patches are still needed unfortunately. The upstream does not seem to like them, but have not offered any good alternative solution either that would scale.
There's been few attempts to request them in the mailing list but it's been more or less silence from them.
Timo
On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:56:04 -0500 Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
I do not know if the patches still need applying and worse the links in our documentation for the patches are no longer valid.
Timo -
Is it still necessary to patch strongswan, and if so where can we point people at the appropriate patches?
thanks!
donald
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 9:47 PM Антон Жаровцев <warm.anton@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello. According to nhrpd docs (http://docs.frrouting.org/en/latest/nhrpd.html) need to patches strongswan to work together with frr/nhrpd but this document has date 2017.
Is it still need to apply thous patches on strongswan or fresh versions of FRR and strongswan will work together out of the box now ?
B.t.w. 1 month ago I tried to set up nhrp network without ipsec but all traffic went through hubs. I did not try to use strongswan due to need to apply this patch (I don't like patched software on docker containers, it is hard to support it then) _______________________________________________ frog mailing list frog@lists.frrouting.org https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/frog