[Info-vax] The continued ham-stringing of IPsec/VMS - Cui Bono? - TUDs -

[Bob Koehler]

In article <SLmdnQbXVe1_p3XXnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d at giganews.com>, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> writes:
> 
> Isn't the NIC the responsibility of the driver?  It simply sends what 
> it's told to send and listens for traffic addressed to it.  Wouldn't 
> IPSEC encryption be done before the NIC and the driver got involved?

   And if that NIC wasn't tested under VMS 8.4, and a change to 8.4
   broke the driver, how many owners of that NIC would be happy with
   VMS 8.4?

   What do you think there shipping, Windows?