Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: linux-ipsec: VS: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ?
From: "John D. Hardin" <jhardin () wolfenet com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 08:01:58 -0700 (PDT)
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999 O.Schnapauff () tu-bs de wrote:
As John already pointed out he is working on NAT for IPSec traffic
NB- I think I've taken IPSec masquerade about as far as it can be
taken without attempting to communicate with the endpoint gateways or
act as an intelligent proxy and participate in any of the encryption.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ jhardin () wolfenet com
pgpk -a finger://gonzo.wolfenet.com/jhardin PGP key ID: 0x41EA94F5
PGP key fingerprint: A3 0C 5B C2 EF 0D 2C E5 E9 BF C8 33 A7 A9 CE 76
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency can magnify good, but it magnifies evil just as well.
So, we should not be surprised to find that modern electronic
communication magnifies stupidity as *efficiently* as it magnifies
intelligence.
-- Robert A. Matern
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
51 days until 9/9/99
Current thread:
- IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? Otel Florian-Daniel (Jul 16)
- Re: linux-ipsec: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? Kurt Seifried (Jul 16)
- Re: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? Steven Brown (Jul 16)
- Re: linux-ipsec: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? John D. Hardin (Jul 18)
- VS: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? Pekka Turunen (Jul 19)
- Re: linux-ipsec: VS: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? O . Schnapauff (Jul 20)
- Re: linux-ipsec: VS: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? John D. Hardin (Jul 20)
- Re: linux-ipsec: VS: IP tunnel over a NAT (IP masq) possible ? O . Schnapauff (Jul 20)
