Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:32:01 +0200 From: VANHULLEBUS Yvan <vanhu_bsd@zeninc.net> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Cc: Sam Wun <smw2010@gmail.com> Subject: Re: patch for IPSEC_NAT_T Message-ID: <20061013143201.GA21926@zen.inc> In-Reply-To: <ff64092b0610130727y3417027dr501c29677fa10ee2@mail.gmail.com> References: <25685948.1160744185756.JavaMail.root@web03sl> <20061013130256.GA10192@zen.inc> <ff64092b0610130727y3417027dr501c29677fa10ee2@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 12:27:22AM +1000, Sam Wun wrote: > in the kernel config file, what if I only define options IPSEC_NAT_T without > defining FAST_IPSEC? > I m not familiar with FAST_IPSEC, if I compile IPSEC_NAT_T with or without > FAST_IPSEC, what s that going to affect my current IPSEC configuration and > connection? Patch works for both IPSEC and FAST_IPSEC. So if you have one of them activated, you'll have NAT-T support. I don't know what will happen if you define IPSEC_NAT_T, but not IPSEC / FAST_IPSEC, guess it will generate the same thing as if you didn' define IPSEC_NAT_T. Yvan. -- NETASQ http://www.netasq.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061013143201.GA21926>