Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:35:06 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: brian@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/ppp ccp.c ccp.h command.c deflate.c fsm.c fsm.h ip.c mppe.c ppp.8 pred.c Message-ID: <200106181535.f5IFZ6h05793@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> of "Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:24:10 EDT." <200106181524.f5IFOB604430@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 18 Jun, Brian Somers wrote:
> > brian 2001/06/18 08:00:24 PDT
> >
> > Modified files:
> > usr.sbin/ppp ccp.c ccp.h command.c deflate.c fsm.c
> > fsm.h ip.c mppe.c ppp.8 pred.c
> > Log:
> > Add support for stateful MPPE (microsoft encryption) providing
> > encryption compatibility with Windows 2000. Stateful encryption
> > uses less CPU but is bad on lossy transports.
>
> So, I suppose, I'll now be able to avoid using SSH and use PPP
> with encryption over a device like host:port/tcp directly, without
> the
> set login "!ssh tunnel@host"
>
> Great! Thanks,
Aye.
IMHO PPPoUDP with encryption is the best option for VPNs where one
side has a dynamic IP. For static gateway IPs with private (rfc1918)
addresses, IPSEC and gif are better. With real IPs, IPSEC on its own
is best.
> -mi
--
Brian <brian@freebsd-services.co.uk> <brian@Awfulhak.org>
http://www.freebsd-services.co.uk/ <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200106181535.f5IFZ6h05793>