Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:20:49 +0000 From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org> To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Cc: Nickolay Kritsky <Nickolay.Kritsky@astra-sw.com> Subject: Re: gif(4) and bpf(4) Message-ID: <20050125172049.GL47638@dhcp120.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20050125171120.GH59685@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <D86BF562467D944EB435513F725B236A07C122@exchange.stardevelopers4msi.com> <20050125171120.GH59685@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 06:11:20PM +0100, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: [...] > thus consuming too much bandwidth. In fact it appeared that my gif(4) > interface is totally useless in my setup. I'm going to switch to > transport mode ASAP and tell my friend he owes me and you all a beer. I forgot to say in my original reply that I was using IPSEC transport mode. When I was discussing this with Bill Fenner he pointed out that there was no such thing as IPSEC 'interface mode', though there had been some discussion during the standards process about the need for such a thing. The combination of IPSEC transport mode and a tunneling protocol provides such a mode. Regards, BMS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050125172049.GL47638>