From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 22 04:28:47 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E73BD16A4B3 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 04:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from highland.isltd.insignia.com (highland.isltd.insignia.com [195.74.141.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB2B443F85 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 04:28:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from subscriber@insignia.com) Received: from dailuaine.isltd.insignia.com (dailuaine.isltd.insignia.com [172.16.64.11])h9MBSjf2048547 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:28:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from subscriber@insignia.com) Received: from tomatin (tomatin [172.16.64.128])h9MBSjSX084154 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:28:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from subscriber@insignia.com) From: Jim Hatfield To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:28:45 +0100 Organization: Insignia Solutions Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.38 Subject: IPSec VPNs: to gif or not to gif X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 11:28:48 -0000 I will shortly be replacing a couple of proprietary VPN boxes with a FreeBSD solution. Section 10.10 of the Handbook has a=20 detailed description of how to do this. However I remember a lot of discussion about a year ago about whether the gif interface was necessary to set up VPNs like this or whether it was just a convenience, for "getting the routing right". A number of people said that gif was not=20 needed but I've never found a step-by-step description of how to set up a lan-to-lan VPN without using it. Is the Handbook the current received wisdom on how to set this up, and is the use of the gif interface indeed necessary? I also remember that the discussions diverted into a problem with ipfw when gif was *not* used, but I haven't found any messages to indicate that it was resolved. I recall suggestions that a new interface esp0 be created so that ipfw could work correctly on both the innner and outer packets of an ESP tunnel. Was that issue ever resolved? jim hatfield