On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 10:19:33PM +1100, Andrew Thomson wrote: > Thanks, that worked a treat for me too.. everything back to normal! > > So what's the go with this fast_ipsec business. Is this going to be the > main implementation for Freebsd? I believe the main reason FAST_IPSEC came to be is support for crypto hardware. However, FAST_IPSEC cannot replace KAME IPsec. FAST_IPSEC is IPv4-only whereas KAME is IPv6 with its required IPsec abilities "back-ported" into the IPv4 stack. It would be really, really nice to get this bug out of KAME IPsec before 5.2.1, but if 5.2 didn't wait... > On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 16:53 +0100, Guido van Rooij wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 11:04:36PM -0800, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > > > I have seen the same. Somehow it looks like ISAKMP traffic, which used to > > > > go around the ipsec policy, is now included. The only workaround I know > > > > of is to replace "require" with "use". > > > > > > A little late on this, but FAST_IPSEC rather than KAME IPsec will fix > > > the problem. > > > > Thanks! That helped! > > > > -Guido -- Crist J. Clark | cjclark_at_alum.mit.edu | cjclark_at_jhu.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | cjc_at_freebsd.orgReceived on Wed Feb 04 2004 - 12:21:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:41 UTC