On 12/10/2015 11:34 AM, Andreas Steffen wrote:
By the way
ike=aes256-sha2_256-ecp512bp
does not give you constant 256 bit security. The correct choice is
ike=aes256-sha512-ecp512bp!
Make sure to add the '!' strict flag at the end of your proposal
list. Otherwise a big list of default strongSwan proposals will be
appended.
While we are on this topic, is there any sort of consensus on proposals
to use when connecting Strongswan boxen?
I am generally connecting two types of tunnels, both of which carry SIP
voice traffic:
1.) Device supporting AES-NI to Device not supporting AES-NI
2.) Two devices that both support AES-NI
Given the gains in encryption/decryption speed, I presume that the
combination that combines the best tradeoff between security,
throughput, and latency will be different depending on which of those
two types is being set up, and as evidenced above, I clearly don't know
enough to wisely choose a good combination.
At one point I had chosen these settings, but they are likely far from
optimal.
ike=aes128gcm128-aesxcbc-ecp512bp
esp=aes128gcm128-ecp512bp
My apologies if this is a question with an obvious answer that I have
simply missed.
Thank you,
Tom
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.strongswan.org
https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
