[Openswan dev] Re: [PATCH] Openswan and OS X with NAT-T

[Michael Richardson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Van der Beken <peterv at propagandism.org> writes:
    Peter> There's some news on the OS X front: 10.4.5 now supports RFC
    Peter> 3947 NAT traversal out of the box. 10.4.4 claimed to support
    Peter> it, but it still inverted the hashes for local side and
    Peter> remote side.

  so, we put code in such that it didn't matter the order of the hashes.
  Given that, 10.4.4 should have worked.
  If OSX 10.4.5 supports RFC3947 out of the box, how come we need a
patch?

  I'm really confused here.
  It seems that 10.4.5 is broken, if we need to patch to work with it.
  Or, are you claiming openswan 2.4.5 has a bug still?

- -- 
]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr at xelerance.com      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQEVAwUBQ/U5M4CLcPvd0N1lAQKFNQf+OVXyNJwK9IObaNctyYME6Lb3z1JGXEEN
Zh2j9OOi3IVgxfWQUvk38pLD7gYwShXttaCXgW6wNtPzKICw+gSymTVK6biuTMyA
NUlrJmJiih4ns6bmtpXHSov7pAahgQabGOSiKyNDgD3ZCvJxLQSCmAgf73ftAXnw
3D1M7k04GirZm2tzthfiHlcrbHfuF249AMwl4Xh2hALxyeovbFA6EvuVCiIcnVbQ
zWEudlRrlJQ5Ti5UqTrGbhYjE/uNS21BqnZ+YwvqwJYjvXbeSLdonigEix8PxhzB
2xnokkPTDUAM5ISk7rdfwbWpBBPxebmFxOOYe8bpHD+NLZZul0JUjQ==
=ktGS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----