Tom

thanks for the details.

At 07:41 02.03.2004 -0800, Tom Eastep wrote:
>On Tuesday 02 March 2004 02:31 am, Erich Titl wrote:
>
>...
>The 2.6 native implementation does away with the 'ipsecN' devices. So all 
>VPN/tunnel types *except* IPSEC use a separate device for tunneling; once the 
>changes to netfilter to *really* support this implementation are in place, 
>IPSEC will pass each tunneled packet through the tables twice -- once for the 
>unencrypted copy of the packet and once for the encrypted packet.

Arghhhh....

>..
>I've not personally tried it, Erich -- there was one user on one of the lists 
>who was seeing traffic in one direction (inbound IIRC) bypassing the ipsec0 
>device but I never heard if that was a problem with his tunnel setup or a 
>feature of openswan...

I am subscribed to the freeswan list. I believe I saw the post but believe also it was 
due to misconfiguration...

Thanks again Tom

Erich

THINK 
P�ntenstrasse 39 
8143 Stallikon 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
PGP Fingerprint: BC9A 25BC 3954 3BC8 C024 8D8A B7D4 FF9D 05B8 0A16




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id56&alloc_id438&op=click

_______________________________________________
leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel

Reply via email to