From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 28 15:55:57 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640E816A41F for ; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:55:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from b.candler@pobox.com) Received: from thorn.pobox.com (thorn.pobox.com [208.210.124.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F073443D8E for ; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:55:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from b.candler@pobox.com) Received: from thorn (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thorn.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3451FC1; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:56:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from mappit.local.linnet.org (212-74-113-67.static.dsl.as9105.com [212.74.113.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by thorn.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA1344CC; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:56:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from brian by mappit.local.linnet.org with local (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ErdeT-0001s3-Pv; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:55:45 +0000 Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:55:45 +0000 From: Brian Candler To: Eric Masson Message-ID: <20051228155545.GA7166@uk.tiscali.com> References: <20051228143817.GA6898@uk.tiscali.com> <86lky5p7ik.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86lky5p7ik.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPSEC documentation X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:55:57 -0000 On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 04:26:43PM +0100, Eric Masson wrote: > gif/gre tunnels and ipsec transport mode are quite convenient when > associated with dynamic routing protocols. OK, I'll buy gif + IPSEC transport mode as an option. [Although in that case, perhaps what you want is an external IPSEC tunnel mode implementation which attaches to a 'tun' device. That's yet another category which I hadn't even considered] I still think that gif + IPSEC tunnel mode (as currently documented) is not a good approach, especially if it's the *only* mode of operation to be documented and hence implicitly recommended as the 'right' way to do it.