Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 13:21:01 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: FreeBSD current mailing list <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: IPSec + 5.2.current Problem Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0408091314260.1709@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20040809150754.13ca108a@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <200408080622.i786Mnhe017474@www1.pochta.ru> <20040808132524.GB1033@mehnert.org><20040809112700.GB659@mehnert.org> <20040809150754.13ca108a@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 13:27:00 +0200 > Hannes Mehnert <hannes@mehnert.org> wrote: > > > > So you're able to transfer data over the tunnel with IPSEC? > > > > Yes, I'm able to transfer packets with IPSEC and IPSEC_ESP (just > > verified this). But I use FAST_IPSEC because i have a soekris vpn1411 > > (http://www.soekris.com/vpn1401.htm). > > > > I also had some problems with IPSEC and IPSEC_ESP, changing require > > to use in the policies fixed that. With require racoon was not able > > to initiate phase 1, because all non esp traffic was dropped. whyever I hadn't seen this posting. > I think this is a datapoint... I use a "require" policy too. ATM I can't > test with "use" instead. but this problem had been fixed months ago for IPSEC. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.53.0408091314260.1709>