[Openswan dev] Qustion about Nat-t

[Paul Wouters]

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, John Denker wrote:

> *) NAT is a kludgey way of extending the IPv4 address space.
>  IPv6 is an incomparably better way of extending the IPv4
>  address space.

> *) A basic principle of engineering is to aim for the moving
>  target.  NAT is the way of the past.  The future will be
>  more and more IPv6.

The move to more ipv6 will only happen with more 6to4 and 4to6
NAT's, and horribly DNS kludges to make ipv4-only systems talk
to ipv6-only systems and visa versa.

Welcome to the real world, Neo.

> Really?  Do you actually know of any home gateways that will
>  a) forward IKE and ESPinUDP, but
>  b) not properly terminate SIT tunnels, and
>  c) not even forward SIT packets?
>
> If you know of any such, I'd like to hear about it.  I don't
> actually know of any.  I'd be astonished if they made up 90%
> of the market.  I'd be mildly surprised if they covered even
> 10% of the Openswan users.

How do you set this up on a Windows laptop or Windows Mobile
telephone, without installing additional software and
Administrative permissions? 90% of Openswan users have an
openswan server with incoming Windows and OSX clients.

Paul