Re: libnet NG vs. libnet and Python bindings...

At Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:13:14 +0100,
Fr=E9d=E9ric Raynal wrote:
> NG is already workable ;-) No ...  ok, let's be serious. To be 1.1
> compliant, I still need to port some protocols (builders). That is
> not really difficult most of the time but it takes time. Just to
> motivate some volunteers who could help me, that is a really good
> way to go into NG internals (if it is still not enough, I can still
> pay a beer for each ported builder ;)

:-)  I think it's good enough to start with.   I will be working on
both FreeBSD and Mac OS X (10.3.7).  It will be slow going as this
project only gets 20% of my time, but I will do what I can.  On OSX There is
a fink package for libnet as well as a darwin port of libnet11.  I
may, but probably won't, set up a similar package for NG.

> There is another issue, more complicated to handle: porting it to
> different OS/architecture. I worked on those I have access to, but I
> cant really do anything for others :(

I am only on FreeBSD and Mac OS X for now.  I might do Linux/Zaurus
(ARM) but that's far off right now.

> About compatibility, it has been designed to be compatible with the
> current API, and it is mostly. Have a look in src/README.ng, there
> are all the information.

Yup, found that, going to give it a read later.

> Some documentation:
> - internal designs:
>   http://www.security-labs.org/index.php3?page=3Dlibnetng
>=20
> - full documentation (also included in the sources):
>   http://www.security-labs.org/libnetng/README.ng
>=20

Great!

> I have several features in mind to add. However, it seems it is time
> to take care of the builders. So, I'll work on that asap.
>=20
> 	Fred Raynal
>=20
> PS: I started compilation tests under FreeBSD 5.3, and it compiles
> now. But I still have some execution tests to perform.

Great.  I'm on the list so I'll be following all this.

Thanks,
George