From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 20 13:23:28 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CB0E1065670 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:23:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vanhu@zeninc.net) Received: from smtp.zeninc.net (smtp.zeninc.net [80.67.176.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F048FC1F for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:23:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from astro.zen.inc (astro.zen.inc [192.168.1.239]) by smtp.zeninc.net (smtpd) with ESMTP id 8801C2798BC; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:04:24 +0100 (CET) Received: by astro.zen.inc (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 88F8717058; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:04:24 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:04:24 +0100 From: VANHULLEBUS Yvan To: "Rabidinov M.A." Message-ID: <20100120130424.GA44272@zeninc.net> References: <659350866.20100120151602@mail.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <659350866.20100120151602@mail.ru> User-Agent: All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less. Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPSec NAT-T in transport mode X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:23:28 -0000 On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:16:02PM +0600, Rabidinov M.A. wrote: > Hello, Freebsd-stable. Hi. > Does FreeBSD 8.0 support IPSec NAT-T in transport mode? > I want to create a L2TP/IPSec server. My VPN clients are NATed. > L2TP server (MPD5.x) makes tunnel, so I need working IPSec NAT-T in transport mode. > Thanks a lot. It may work..... or not.... The missing part is support of NAT-OA payloads, which are used to update checksums when receiving packets. For TCP, this is mandatory. For UDP (so for L2TP), checksums of 0 are allowed, and of course not checked, so packet will go to destination. But afaik, most L2TP implementations computes checksums, so they will be checked, and of course will be wrong.... Yvan.