Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Dec 2000 03:24:57 -0800
From:      Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>
To:        "Ari Suutari" <ari@suutari.iki.fi>
Cc:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: IPFW & IPsec tunnel mode 
Message-ID:  <200012161125.eBGBPkP05378@cwsys.cwsent.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Dec 2000 09:20:40 %2B0200." <001301c0601e$34cab880$0e05a8c0@intranet.syncrontech.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <001301c0601e$34cab880$0e05a8c0@intranet.syncrontech.com>, 
"Ari Suut
ari" writes:
> However, pipsecd only supports fixed keys and Kame seems more
> like the future way to go. Would it be possible to enhance ipfw & kame
> to work together better in same way (like having some kind of name for
> each tunnel and allowing ipfw rule to use them in similar way as
> 'via' is used with interfaces) ?

Check the -security archives.  This was just discussed about a month 
ago.  In that thread a KAME developer explained why it cannot be 
accomplished.


Regards,                         Phone:  (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert                        Fax:  (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/Alpha Team   Internet:  Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA
Province of BC





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012161125.eBGBPkP05378>