Re: delete-sa-01 test
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freeswan.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Sam" == Sam Sgro <[email protected]> writes: Sam> I've created a UML test which demonstrates Delete SA functionality, Sam> delete-sa-01. I know I may not have all the code bits in the right Sam> place; the test isn't turned on, and I'm trying to subscribe to the Sam> "commit code early" philosophy. Excellent to hear! Sam> Expect the test to fail when formally running it; I haven't figured Sam> out how to suppress the variable elements from the ping test I Sam> employ (the summary line, which will almost always vary). Sam, I'm ill today, but ping me when you arise, and I'll help you deal with this. Sam> Mathieu: given that both SAs are in the process of being deleted, is Sam> there a logic to not sending a delete for the IPSec SA as well? Mathieu, could we ask to to take a look? Best would be if we could convince you to set up the test environment. ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Finger me for keys iQCVAwUBPkRgIYqHRg3pndX9AQEfUgQA70OM38x7oXwcdR/BfllT/I0G8GGVQHTo fQAzhiGko+gZHOrp9Y1NdTX2D5kcgbwQDDQSoHJBqWSKtoZWWoJvG12sx5RYJ0tV +2AnViAj3fowb62z943+fmghAY53fS1dJb+5dyNKtUKjxBXWAmBsQSr+DM4HMAm3 HLhs+Og9zIo= =uxp/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----