[Openswan dev] Qustion about Nat-t
paul at xelerance.com
Sun Mar 1 16:38:56 EST 2009
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.
More information about the Dev